SSI  •  >,.'' 


k< 


r 


The  Late  Queen  Victoria 


LONDON 


HISTORIC    AND    SOCIAL 


BY 
CLAUDE  DE  LA   ROCHE  FRANCIS 


ILLUSTRATED 


IN   TWO  VOLUMES 
VOL.    I 


PHILADELPHIA 

HENRY    T.    COATES    &    CO. 
1902 


COPYRIGHT, 

HENRY   T.   COATES  &   CO. 
1901. 


SRLF 
URL 


5145009 


CONTENTS 

VOLUME  I 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.  INTRODUCTORY, 1 

II.  ROMAN  LONDON, 16 

III.  SAXON  LONDON, 42 

IV.  NORMAN  LONDON, 87 

V.  LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS,   .   .   .  128 

VI.  LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK,    .   .211 

VII.  LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS, 259 

VIII.  LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS  (CONTINUED),  .   .  302 
IX.  LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS,    ....  347 


LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS 

VOLUME  I 


Photogravures  made  by  GILBO  &  Co. 


PAGE 


THE  LATE  QUEEN  VICTORIA,      ....       Frontispiece. 

A  "BEEF  EATER,"  TOWER  OF  LONDON,    ....  38 

THE  CROWN  JEWELS,  TOWER  OF  LONDON,       ...  48 

POST-OFFICE, 66 

WESTMINSTER  ABBEY, 82 

TOWER  OF  LONDON, 92 

THE  ARMORY,  TOWER  OF  LONDON, 98 

TRAITOR'S  GATE,  TOWER  OF  LONDON,       ....  102 

INNER  TEMPLE  AND  GARDEN, 120 

CORONATION  CHAIR,  WESTMINSTER  ABBEY,       .       .       .  130 

SCREEN  IN  HENRY  VII.'s  CHAPEL,  WESTMINSTER  ABBEY,  152 

ELEANOR'S  CROSS,  CHARING  CROSS, 170 

ST.  PAUL'S  CATHEDRAL, 182 

MIDDLE  TEMPLE,  HALL, 196 

GUILD  HALL, 216 

v 


vi  LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS. 

PAGE 

LONDON  BRIDGE 234 

BLOODY  TOWER,  TOWER  OF  LONDON,         ....  252 

NAVE,  WESTMINSTER  ABBEY, 272 

ST.  JAMES  PALACE, 286 

SOMERSET  HOUSE, 304 

TEMPLE  BAR,  REMOVED  IN  1878, 322 

HAMPTON  COURT  PALACE, 352 

WINDSOR  CASTLE,  FROM  THE  THAMES,      ....  380 

MARBLE  ARCH,  HYDE  PARK, 392 


PREFACE. 


IT  is  difficult  to  write  without  a  certain  emotion  of 
the  world's  greatest  metropolis.  London  has  a  history 
so  varied,  a  past  so  majestic,  a  present  so  important, 
and  a  future  so  problematic  that  even  in  a  partial  and 
incomplete  appreciation  of  so  vast  a  subject  all  the 
emotions  and  well  nigh  all  the  resources  of  descrip- 
tion and  rhetoric  could  well  be  called  into  requisition. 
To  trace,  even  in  a  most  superficial  manner,  the  his- 
tory of  this  wonderful  city  from  the  remote  antiquity 
in  which  its  origin  is  buried,  from  those  days  to  which 
are  attributable  the  legends  of  Brutus,  its  hypothetical 
founder,  of  Beliu  and  King  Lud,  down  through  the 
ages  which  have  since  expired,  the  Roman  Occupation, 
the  Saxon  and  Danish  Monarchies,  the  Norman  Period, 
the  rule  of  the  Plantagenets,  the  Tudors  and  the  Stu- 
arts, and  that  of  the  House  of  Brunswick ;  to  give 
even  the  barest  outline  of  its  growth  civic  and  archi- 
tectural, an  outline  sufficient  to  create  a  picture  of  the 
manners  and  customs  of  each  successive  age,  and  at 
the  same  time  convey  an  understanding  of  the  politi- 
cal, the  social  and  the  intellectual  life  of  the  successive 


viii  PREFACE. 

periods,  is  in  itself  perhaps  no  unambitious  task,  and 
one  but  very  imperfectly  fulfilled  in  the  following 
pages. 

The  superficial  observer,  the  traveller  passing 
through  England's  capital  and  according  to  it  but 
the  attention  granted  by  the  ordinary  tourist,  would 
assure  you  that  he  knew  his  London  and  had  seen  its 
sights  in  at  most  a  fortnight  or  but  somewhat  longer 
period  ;  but  he  who  knows  London — as  the  student  of 
its  monuments,  and  more  especially  of  its  history,  its 
traditions  and  its  local  lore,  alone  can  know  it — would 
tell  you  that  a  year  of  conscientious  work  was  scarce 
sufficient  to  know  London  as  it  should  be  known. 
The  surface  view  is,  at  times,  not  prepossessing. 
To  those  accustomed  to  the  straight  and  splendid 
thoroughfares  of  modern  capitals,  the  lack  of  sym- 
metry in  plan  and,  even  more  so,  the  lack  of  "  vista," 
so  inevitable  where  streets  curve,  and  no  effort  has 
been  made  to  unite  outlying  districts  by  means  of 
broad,  straight  avenues,  are  the  first  observable  results 
of  that  method  whereby  London  has  been  permitted 
to  grow,  as  it  were,  unaided  by  a  master  plan,  village 
after  village  being  incorporated  in  the  all-encroaching 
city,  just  as  it  was  before  absorption,  and  alterations 
only  attempted  when  property  has  already  become  too 
valuable  for  improvement  on  extended  scale.  This, 
the  result  of  the  policy  of  deliberateness,  so  conspicu- 
ous in  the  political  life  of  the  nation,  as  well  as  in  its 
civic  development,  though  it  may  have  proved  disas- 


PREFACE.  ix 

trous  to  metropolitan  unity,  has  had  the  ineffaceable 
advantage  of  leaving  to  each  locality,  to  every  incorpor- 
ated village,  its  character,  special  and  peculiar ;  which 
makes  London  de  facto  what  it  is  in  municipal  the- 
ory, an  aggregation  of  small  towns  rather  than  one 
giant  city.  Nor  is  the  climate  and  its  permeating 
humidity  blameless  in  the  sombre  aspect  which  has 
been  given  to  things  external.  Penetrate,  however, 
beneath  the  surface,  discover  the  by-ways  of  London 
life,  its  hidden  churches,  its  relics  of  the  monastic 
age,  its  bits  of  mediaeval  architecture,  its  obscure 
squares  and  parkings,  its  street  marts  and  those  num- 
erous hives  of  its  lower  industrial  life,  and  arrive  at  a 
true  understanding  of  its  institutions,  civic,  social, 
commercial,  and  of  the  many  interests  of  its  tremen- 
dous and  teeming  populations,  differing  so  widely  in 
its  several  quarters,  through  racial  and  linguistic  and 
ever-varying  domestic  problems,  and  London  looms 
up  before  you  with  a  majesty,  a  dignity,  a  splendor 
and  an  all-absorbing  interest  quite  unknown  to  the 
West  End  sybarite  or  the  passing  traveller. 

The  kind  courtesy  of  my  publishers  has  enabled  me 
through  an  additional  grant  of  time  to  more  effectu- 
ally accomplish  my  task  than  otherwise  I  could  have 
done.  In  the  hope  of  rendering  these  studies  more 
complete  I  have  consulted  most  of  the  authorities  by 
whom  my  subject  has  been  already  treated.  Personal 
observation  and  special  investigation  of  my  own  has 
done  the  rest.  To  the  Rev.  W.  J.  Loftie,  B.A.,  F.S.A., 


x  PREFACE. 

the  most  conscientious  exponent  of  London's  his- 
toric life,  I  wish  here  to  express  my  thanks  for  the 
valuable  advantage  derived  from  a  close  study  of  his 
work.  These  few  remarks  will  be  all,  I  trust,  that 
are  necessary  to  introduce  the  following  pages  to  the 
esteem  and  consideration  of  an  indulgent  public. 


C.  DE  LA  ROCHE  FRANCIS. 


Thursday,  July  25,  1901. 
London,  England. 


LONDON. 


CHAPTER    I. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

The  Story  of  Troy-Novant — JSneas  the  Ancestor  of  the  Early  Brit- 
ish Kings— His  Arrival  in  Latium — His  Marriage  to  Lavinia — 
Discovery  of  Alba  Longa  by  Ascanius — The  Birth  of  Brutus — 
His  Flight  to  Hellas — His  Arrival  in  Albion — The  Settlement 
of  Britain — The  Founding  of  New  Troy — The  Trojan  Dynasty 
in  Britain — Bledhud — King  Lear  and  his  Three  Daughters — 
Dunwallo  Molmutius  Founds  the  Molruutian  Dynasty — Belin, 
the  Builder  of  Belin's  Gate  (Billingsgate)— King  Lud,  the 
Builder  of  Lud  Gate  (Ludgate) — Troy-Novant  Becomes  Kae'r 
Lud — The  First  Invasion  of  the  Romans — Tenuantius  Effects  a 
Peace  with  Caesar — He  Founds  the  Tenuantine  Dynasty — Kym- 
berline — The  Legends  of  Lucius  and  the  Early  British  Church — 
The  Early  British  Tribes— London  the  Capital  of  the  Trino- 
bantes^London  as  the  Romans  Found  It — The  Thames — The 
Ford  at  Thorny  Isle — The  First  London  Bridge — Religion, 
Government  and  Customs  of  the  British  or  Pre-Roman  Period. 

LIKE  all  famous  cities,  London  had  its  legendary  as 
well  as  its  authentic  history.  The  same  desire  for 
illustrious  and  far-distant  ancestry  which  led  the 
Greeks  to  seek  descent  from  primeval  gods  caused  the 
early  Britons — or  perhaps  was  it  the  later  chroniclers  ? 
— to  seek  in  mythic  legends  a  noteworthy  and  distin- 
VOL.  I.— 1 


2  LONDON. 

guished  origin,  and  it  appears  from  these  authorities 
that  London,  or  as  it  is  said  to  have  first  been  called, 
Troy-Novant  or  New  Troy,  was  founded  by  Brutus, 
grandson  of  the  far-famed  JEneas,  Prince  of  Troy, 
and  that  Britain  was  settled  by  his  followers.  The 
tale  is  found  in  Geoffrey  of  Monmouth,  who,  in  turn, 
claims  to  have  taken  it  from  an  ancient  manuscript  "  in 
the  early  British  tongue,"  discovered  by  one  Gualtier 
Mappes,  Archdeacon  of  Oxford,  who  brought  it  to 
Geoffrey  of  Monmouth  for  him  to  translate  and  edit. 
Herein  we  read  that  on  the  fall  of  Troy,  JEneas,  a 
prince  of  the  royal  Trojan  house,  fled  from  the  cap- 
tured city  and  set  sail  towards  the  west,  and,  after 
adventures  as  various  as  they  were  extraordinary, 
landed  in  Latium  on  the  Italian  main ;  how  he  there 
married  Lavinia,  daughter  of  the  king  of  that  country, 
and  how  he  became  by  her  the  progenitor  of  the  early 
Alba  Longan  kings. 

Of  this  journey  much  has  been  said  by  Diodorus  in 
his  history,  which  we  find  here  repeated,  with  some 
added  details,  and  Virgil  in  his  great  epic  also  en- 
larges on  the  voyage  of  JEneas,  on  his  visit  to  Car- 
thage and  Syracuse,  and  his  final  settlement  in  Latium ; 
and  he,  who  was  the  author  of  Mappes'  reputed 
manuscript,  had  doubtless  knowledge  of  this  source 
of  poetic  history.  Be  that  as  it  may,  he  concurs  with 
Livy  in  stating  that  by  Lavinia  JEneas  became  the 
father  of  a  son,  Ascanius  by  name,  who,  according  to 
this  authority,  being  too  young  on  the  death  of  his 


INTRODUCTORY.  3 

father  to  assume  the  reins  of  government,  started  on  a 
tour  of  foreign  travel,  like  many  a  modern  heir  ap- 
parent, leaving  his  mother  regent  of  the  kingdom. 
Coming  upon  Alba  Longa,  he  was  so  charmed,  we  are 
informed,  by  that  country,  that  he  refused  to  return  to 
Latium,  and  settled  there,  where  he  was  succeeded,  as 
king,  by  his  son,  Sylvus  Pandrasus,  who  had  married 
a  niece  of  Lavinia.  Of  this  marriage  was  born  a  boy, 
Brutus  by  name,  who,  fulfilling  the  prophecy  which 
had  been  made  of  him,  killed  his  father  on  attaining 
his  fifteenth  year,  and  seeking  refuge  first  in  Hellas, 
made  his  way,  after  wondrous  adventures  and  great 
escapes,  to  Albion,  as  Britain,  a  barren  and  unexplored 
island,  was  then  called,  where  he  and  his  followers  estab- 
lished a  colony  and  kingdom,  calling  the  island  Britain, 
after  his  own  name,  from  which  also  his  followers  came 
to  be  called  Britains,  later  corrupted  to  Britons. 

He  it  was,  we  are  told,  who,  in  the  same  year, 
established  his  headquarters  on  the  banks  of  that 
stream  which  is  now  known  as  the  Thames,  calling 
the  settlement  Troy-Novant,  or  Trinovautum — that 
is,  New  Troy,  from  whence,  it  is  also  related,  was 
derived  the  name  of  the  Trinobantes,  by  which  the 
inhabitants  of  this  portion  of  the  isle  of  Albion  were 
known  when  Gesar  first  landed  on  British  soil.  The 
settlement  is  said  to  have  retained  its  original  name 
until  centuries  later,  when  Lud,  the  brother  of  Cassi- 
bellaun,  "having  waged  successful  war  against  the 
Romans,  obtained  the  government  of  the  kingdom  " ; 


4  LONDON. 

and,  to  quote  again  from  the  chronicle,  "He  sur- 
rounded it  with  stately  towers  of  admirable  workman- 
ship, and  ordered  it  to  be  called  after  his  own  name, 
Kae'r  Lud — that  is,  the  town  of  Lud,"  which,  by  cor- 
ruption, has  become  the  London  of  to-day. 

That  the  chain  between  the  person  of  Brutus  and 
the  events  just  related,  and  the  British  chiefs  found 
in  the  possession  of  authority  on  the  entrance  of  the 
Romans,  should  not  be  broken,  the  chroniclers  give 
us  complete  lists  of  kings,  extending  from  the  time  of 
Brutus  to  that  of  the  Roman  invasion,  and  divide 
this  royal  line  into  three  distinct  dynasties  and  periods; 
thus  we  have  the  early  British  line,  descended  from 
the  semi-mythic  Trojans,  the  Molmutian  and  the 
Tenuantine  dynasties,  not  to  speak  of  the  several 
lines  of  later  Welsh  kings. 

It  were  apart  from  the  purpose  of  this  work  to 
enter  in  detail  into  the  legendary  history  of  these 
mythic  monarchs,  nor  yet  would  it  seem  appropriate 
to  follow  the  example  of  the  modern  historians,  who, 
in  their  desire  to  place  the  history  of  the  city  on  an 
absolutely  veracious  basis,  entirely  ignore  the  early 
kings  and  commence  their  histories  with  the  Roman 
occupation.  It  would,  indeed,  seem  as  if  the  more 
famous  of  these  prehistoric  chieftains — for  chieftains, 
if  they  ever  had  any  actual  existence,  they  really 
were — should,  by  the  conscientious  chronicler,  be  ac- 
corded at  least  a  passing  mention  in  the  annals  of  the 
city,  for  so  many  buildings,  sites  and  places  are  held 


INTRODUCTORY.  5 

to  be  associated  with  their  names  that  student  or 
traveller  must  feel  himself  at  sea  without  a  general 
notion  of  this  legend  lore. 

Thus  Bath,  that  far-famed  watering-place  and 
health  resort,  is  said  to  have  been  founded  by  Bladud, 
otherwise  spelled  Bledhud,  the  tenth  in  the  line  of  the 
early  Trojan  kings  of  Britain,  while  the  story  of  his 
immediate  successor  in  the  royal  line,  King  Lear  and 
his  three  daughters,  stands  pre-eminent  among  the 
historic  legends  of  the  times,  and  has  found  an  im- 
perishable place  in  Shakespeare's  immortal  tragedy. 
With  Gorbogudo,  the  nineteenth  in  line,  the  Trojan 
succession  came  to  a  close,  and  Dunwallo  Molmutius, 
son  of  Cloten,  Duke  of  Cornwall,  seizing  the  reins  of 
government,  proclaimed  himself  monarch  of  the 
realm,  and  founded  the  so-called  "  Molmutian  dy- 
nasty," which  gave  to  Britain  no  less  than  forty-eight 
kings,  of  which  the  second,  the  immediate  successor 
of  Dunwallo  himself,  was  the  far-famed  Belin,  to 
whom  the  building  of  Belin's  Gate  (Billingsgate)  has 
been  attributed  ;  while  Lud,  to  whom  legend  has 
ascribed  the  building  of  the  city  walls  and  the  open- 
ing of  Ludgate,  was  the  forty-seventh,  and  Cassibel- 
laun,  during  whose  reign  Caesar's  invasion  took  place, 
is  said  to  have  been  the  forty-eighth.  Indeed  it  is, 
as  we  have  seen,  to  Lud  that  the  change  of  name 
from  Trinovantum  to  Kaer  Lud,  or  London,  has 
been  ascribed  by  the  chroniclers,  and  thus  has  Lud 
been  held  by  many  to  be  the  true  founder  of  the  city. 


6  LONDON. 

By  the  invasion  of  the  Romans,  the  influence  of 
Cassibellaun  was  seriously  affected,  and  thus  it  is  we 
learn  that  "  Caesar,  being  repulsed  by  Androgius,  and 
having  started  for  Home  to  wage  war  against  Pompey, 
Tenuantius,  Duke  of  Cornwall,  who,  with  Androgius, 
had  been  so  greatly  instrumental  in  effecting  a  peace 
between  Caesar  and  Cassibellaun,  sprang  into  leader- 
ship, and,  assuming  the  government,  founded  the 
third,  or  '  Tenuantine  dynasty.' "  His  immediate  suc- 
cessor was  Kymberline,  during  whose  reign  the 
chroniclers  assert  that  Christ,  the  Saviour  of  the 
world,  was  born  in  Bethlehem,  and  his  story,  like  that 
of  Lear,  is  immortalized  by  the  Bard  of  Avon. 

The  Tenuantine  dynasty,  we  are  further  told,  gave 
to  Britain  seven  kings,  of  which  the  last,  a  certain 
Lucius,  is  said  to  have  embraced  Christianity,  and  to 
have  died  childless  in  A.D.  156.  To  him  is  ascribed 
the  founding  of  St.  Peter  upon  Cornhill — a  romantic 
legend  which  we  will  examine  into  further  and  in  its 
proper  place.  The  story  of  his  martyrdom  at  Chur 
(Coire),  Switzerland,  whither  he  had  gone  for  purposes 
of  religious  controversy,  is  well  known,  and  "his 
monument"  there  is  still  shown  to  the  visitor.  So 
much  for  the  legendary  history  of  British  London 
previous  to  the  first  Roman  invasion  under  Caesar. 

Whether  or  not  any  of  this  long  line  of  legendary 
kings  had  any  actual  existence,  they  yet  belong  to  the 
picture  scheme  of  early  British  legend,  and  as  such 
cannot  be  ignored.  There  may  have  been  among  the 


INTRODUCTORY.  7 

early  British  chiefs  a  Bladud  (Bledhud),  a  Lear,  a 
Lud,  and  others  of  this  legendary  line,  but  the  Lon- 
don of  ante-Roman  days  could  not  have  been  what 
the  pride  of  the  chroniclers  portray  ;  for  no  monu- 
mental city  stood  then  where  London  stands  to-day. 
The  London  of  the  Britons  could  have  been  only 
what  Caesar,  Tacitus  and  Strabo  have  described  to  us 
a  British  town  as  being — a  mere  collection  of  huts  set 
down  on  a  dry  spot  in  the  midst  of  a  marsh,  or  in  a 
cleared  space  in  a  wood,  surrounded,  in  addition  to 
these  natural  protections,  by  the  artificial  defences  of  a 
mound  or  ditch.  Before  we  can,  therefore,  obtain  a 
correct  appreciation  of  wrhat  British  London  must 
have  been,  we  should  look  into  the  origin  of  the  in- 
habitants, consider  their  manners,  understand  their 
religion,  their  government  and  their  mode  of  life; 
then  and  only  then  can  the  picture  be  complete. 

Passing  over  those  prehistoric  races  of  which  Europe 
was  once  the  home,  and  of  which  the  Basques  in  South- 
ern France  are  probably  the  present  representatives, 
that  branch  of  the  Indo-European  race,  called  by  cer- 
tain ethnologists  Mediterranean,  may  perhaps  be  best 
divided  into  two  great  divisions,  the  Ionian  and  the 
Kimmerians.  The  first  of  these  include  the  Achaeian 
and  the  Ombro  Latins,  who  settled  the  Greek  and 
Roman  world,  and  the  second  the  Kelts,  the  Teutons 
and  the  Slavs,  by  whom  the  rest  of  Europe  came 
eventually  to  be  settled.  Of  these,  the  Kelts  were 
the  first  to  cross  the  boundaries  of  Asia,  and  to  estab- 


8  LONDON. 

lish  themselves  in  Europe.  The  tide  of  population 
continuing,  however,  to  roll  westward,  they  were  pushed 
forward  by  the  advancing  Teutons,  who  in  turn  yielded 
to  the  pressure  of  the  advancing  Slavs.  At  the  dawn 
of  European  history  we  find  the  Kelts,  however,  in 
possession  of  a  large  part  of  Spain  and  the  British 
Isles. 

In  Britain  the  population,  we  are  told,  consisted  at 
the  time  of  the  first  Roman  invasion  under  Caesar  of 
about  forty  Keltic  tribes,  of  which  some,  while  they 
retained  their  original  appellations,  had  been  deprived 
of  their  independence.  The  long  track  of  land  south 
of  the  Thames  was  unequally  divided  among  some  ten 
nations,  of  which  the  principal  were  the  Cantii,  or  men 
of  Kent;  the  Belgae,  who  inhabited  the  present  coun- 
ties of  Hampshire  and  Wilts,  and  the  Damnonii, 
who  had  extended  themselves  gradually  from  the 
river  Ex  to  that  western  promontory  now  called  Corn- 
wall. Across  that  arm  of  sea  which  we  know  as  the 
British  Channel,  the  most  potent  tribe  was  that  of  the 
Silures,  who  had  carried  their  arms  from  the  banks  of 
the  Wye  to  the  Dee  and  the  ocean,  and  enforced  their 
authority  on  the  Ordovices  and  the  Dimetse,  who  in- 
habited the  northern  mountains  and  west  district  of 
Wales.  On  the  eastern  side,  the  island  was  divided 
between  the  Iceni,  whose  territory  extended  from 
Stour  northward,  including  what  is  now  Suffolk  and 
Norfolk,  to  the  banks  of  the  Humber ;  the  Brigantes, 
who  were  bounded  on  the  south  by  the  Humber  and 


INTRODUCTORY.  9 

on  the  north  by  the  Tyne,  and  who  had  subdued  the 
Volantii  and  the  Sistuntii  of  the  western  coast.  Fur- 
ther north  still  were  the  Macetoe,  and  beyond  these 
again  the  Caledonii,  who,  scantily  clad,  wandered  with 
savage  ferocity  amid  the  lakes  and  the  mountains  of 
the  northern  fastnesses. 

The  left  bank  of  the  upper  Thames  was  under  the 
rule  of  the  Dobuni  and  the  Cassii,  united  tribes; 
while  the  territory  between  the  lower  left  bank  of  the 
Thames  and  the  Stour  was  held  by  the  Trinobantes, 
whose  capital,  as  their  name  indicates,  was  Troy- 
Novant,  or  Trinovantum,  afterwards  Kaer  Lud,  or 
London. 

While  the  greater  proportion  of  the  inhabitants, 
more  particularly  among  the  rude  tribes  of  the  inte- 
rior, sowed  no  corn,  and  were  clad  only  in  skins,  the 
southern  Britons  practiced  agriculture,  and  wore  cloth 
of  their  own  manufacture.  Their  dress  consisted  of  a 
sort  of  square  mantle,  which  partly  covered  a  vest, 
trousers  and  plaited  tunic  of  braided  cloth ;  the  waist 
was  encircled  by  a  belt;  a  ring  adorned  the  second 
finger  of  each  hand,  and  a  chain  of  iron  or  brass  was 
suspended  from  the  neck.  Their  huts  resembled  those 
of  their  Gallic  neighbors.  A  foundation  of  stone  sup- 
ported a  kind  of  circular  structure  of  timber  and 
reeds,  over  which  was  thrown  a  conical  roof,  pierced 
in  the  centre,  for  the  twofold  purpose  of  admitting  the 
light  and  emitting  the  smoke.  As  we  have  already 
said,  in  husbandry  they  possessed  considerable  skill, 


10  LONDON. 

and  had  discovered  the  use  of  the  marl  as  manure. 
They  raised  more  corn  than  was  necessary  for  their 
own  consumption,  and  to  preserve  it  until  the  follow- 
ing harvest  they  stored  it  in  the  cavities  of  the 
rocks. 

Their  principal  commerce  seems  to  have  been  with 
the  Phoenicians,  some  of  the  more  adventurous  of 
whom  braved  the  dangers  of  the  open  ocean,  and, 
sailing  from  Spain  and  Carthage,  brought  their  wares 
to  the  far  distant  shores  of  Britain,  which  they  traded 
for  tin ;  and  thus  did  the  islands  come  in  those  coun- 
tries to  be  known  as  the  Tin  Islands,  or  Cassiterides. 
The  religion  of  the  early  Britons  was  that  of  the 
Druids,  and  had  been  brought  from  Gaul,  in  all  prob- 
ability, by  the  earliest  settlers.  They  thus  worshipped 
gods  similar  in  attributes  to  those  of  Gneco-Roman 
mythology,  though  differing  from  them  in  name.  Of 
the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Druidic  worship,  some 
knowledge  has  descended  to  us.  Their  temples,  usu- 
ally groves  of  lofty  oak  trees,  were  the  more  immense 
from  their  lack  of  architectural  confinement.  At  noon 
and  at  midnight,  held  to  be  the  most  propitious  hours, 
sacrifices  were  celebrated  with  due  solemnity.  The 
trunk  of  one  of  the  giants  of  the  forest  formed  the 
altar  on  which  the  victim  was  bound,  and  its  leaves 
the  chaplets  worn  at  the  sacrifice.  The  fruits  of  the 
earth,  the  spoil  of  battle,  the  beasts  of  the  field  and 
forest,  and  sometimes,  in  times  of  dire  distress  and 
danger,  the  captive  and  the  malefactor  shared  alike 


INTRODUCTORY.  H 

the  honor  of  being  offered  up  in  pious  and  prayerful 
adoration. 

These  rude  people  were  held  in  control  by  a  system 
of  government  partly  patriarchal,  partly  sacerdotal. 
To  the  veneration  which  the  British  Druids  inspired 
was  added  the  respect  which  knowledge  always  in- 
spires in  the  ignorant;  and  while  the  chiefs  occupied 
the  position  of  petty  tribal  kings,  governing  in  all 
matters  appertaining  to  warfare,  the  Druids,  as  the 
sacerdotal  class,  formed  a  kind  of  judiciary — adminis- 
tered justice  and  inflicted  punishments — the  execution 
of  which  remained  to  the  military  force  at  the  disposal 
of  the  kings.  Gradually  it  came  to  be  that  commerce, 
and  the  legal  interests  arising  therefrom,  drew  men 
together,  and  thus  a  group  of  huts  became  a  settle- 
ment, and  a  group  of  settlements  a  town.  These 
towns,  such  as  they  were,  were  usually  in  sheltered 
positions,  strategically  desirable  by  reason  of  the  natu- 
ral protection  afforded  by  an  adjoining  river  and  an 
adjacent  forest,  and  rendered  additionally  safe  by  such 
rude  artificial  devices  as  mounds  of  earth  and  shallow 
ditches.  Within  such  enclosures  Strabo  tells  us  that 
the  inhabitants  were  accustomed  to  stall  as  many  cattle 
as  sufficed  for  a  few  months'  consumption,  and  Caesar 
relates  that  when  the  town  or  fastness  of  Cassivellau- 
nus  fell  into  his  hands,  he  found  in  it  a  great  number 
of  cattle,  which  he  intimates  had  been  brought  thither 
by  the  people  when  they  came  from  all  parts  of  the 
country  to  take  refuge  in  that  stronghold.  It  is  prob- 


12  LONDON. 

able,  however,  that  most  of  the  cattle,  in  which  we 
are  informed  the  island  abounded,  still  remained  wild 
and  unappropriated,  wandering  through  the  woods  and 
pastures,  and  dividing  the  honors  of  the  soil  with  the 
wild  and  savage  population. 

As  regards  London,  we  have  positive  knowledge, 
based  on  reliable  authority,  that,  at  a  date  many  cen- 
turies later,  over  the  area  where  London  now  extends 
a  vast  forest  still  covered  the  country,  and  extended 
some  miles  on  either  side  of  the  river,  and  that  a  fen 
or  lake  of  great  extent — whence  that  part  of  the  me- 
tropolis called  Finsbury  derives  its  name — lay  on  the 
northeast,  close  to  the  settlement.  When  it  was  a 
British  town  it  probably  occupied  only  the  face  and 
summit  of  the  first  natural  elevation,  ascending  from 
the  river  and  stretching  between  what  is  now  the 
Tower,  on  the  one  hand,  to  Dowgate,  near  what  is 
now  Southwark  Bridge,  on  the  other,  and  going  back 
no  further  than  the  line  of  the  present  Cornhill  and 
Leadenhall  Street.  The  Walbrook  and  the  Sher 
Bourne  on  the  west,  and  the  Lang  Bourne  on  the 
north — though  they  had  not  acquired  their  later  ce- 
lebrity and  were  known  neither  by  these,  nor,  in  all 
probability,  by  any  other  names — and  to  the  east  the 
wide-spread  marsh  which  long  after  continued  to  cover 
the  low  grounds,  now  occupied  by  the  suburb  of 
Wapping,  furnished  such  natural  boundaries  as  were 
usually  sought  by  the  founders  of  these  early  settle- 
ments. 


INTRODUCTORY.  13 

There  was,  in  all  probability,  a  small  settlement  on 
the  south  bank  of  the  river,  access  to  which  from  the 
north  bank  was  had  by  a  ford  near  Westminster,  by 
boat,  and  later  by  a  primitive  bridge,  which  was  the 
remote  predecessor  of  the  London  Bridge  of  to-day. 
That  the  river  was  first  forded  at  Westminster  may  be 
deduced  by  one  glance  at  the  map,  and  a  careful  study 
of  the  topography  of  the  adjoining  country. 

Many  of  the  ancient  roads,  afterwards  deflected  and 
diverted  by  the  Romans  during  their  occupancy,  ac- 
cording to  a  well-determined  scheme,  converged  at  a 
single  point  on  the  northern  bank  of  the  Thames. 
Some,  indeed,  after  traversing  the  country  for  hun- 
dreds of  miles  in  a  perfectly  straight  line,  turned  aside 
in  order  to  reach  this  point.  The  reason  for  this  was, 
unquestionably,  the  desire  to  find  the  most  advan- 
tageous place  to  eifect  a  crossing  of  the  river.  The 
most  desirable  would,  however,  perforce  depend  upon 
the  method  of  crossing  to  be  employed.  If  the  river 
were  to  be  crossed  by  a  bridge,  naturally  the  deepest, 
because  it  was  the  narrowest  place,  would  be  the  one 
selected;  if  by  a  ford,  the  widest,  because  it  was  the 
shallowest,  would  be  preferred.  While  it  is  impos- 
sible to  state  at  what  time  London  Bridge  was  erected, 
as  its  building  defies  and  antedates  the  memory  of 
man,  yet  the  presumption  is  that  in  the  earliest  times 
there  was  no  bridge,  and  that  the  river  was  therefore 
crossed  by  a  ford  at  the  shallowest,  and  consequently 
the  widest  place. 


14  LONDON. 

This  hypothesis  is  supported  by  the  fact  that  in  the 
earliest  times  of  which  knowledge  has  descended  to 
us,  the  very  ancient  ways  above  referred  to  seem  to 
have  converged  and  joined  each  other  at  the  site  of 
the  present  Kilburn  or  St.  John's  Wood,  followed 
what  is  now  Edgware  Road,  and  went  on  in  a 
straight  line,  now  slightly  diverted  by  Park  Lane, 
towards  Westminster,  where  the  road  ran  along  a 
low  ridge,  now  Tothill  Fields,  and  so  reached  the 
Thames.  This  ancient  way  was  that  which  led  from 
Chester  towards  Dover,  and  came  in  Saxon  times  to 
be  called  the  Watling  Street.  It  was  said  to  follow 
the  course  of  the  Milky  Way,  and  the  name  was 
applied  to  both.  On  the  Surrey  bank,  where  St. 
Thomas'  Hospital  now  stands,  was  a  similar  road, 
now  Stangate  or  Stone  Street — "  the  paved  way  " — 
which  road  sought  at  once  the  Surrey  hills  and  so 
crossed  to  the  southern  coast.  It  is  therefore  more 
than  probable  that  the  Watling  Street  crossed  the 
Thames  by  a  ford  at  the  place  described. 

Later,  however,  it  being  desired  to  erect  a  bridge, 
the  narrowest  place — a  spot  near  St.  Olave's  Church — 
was  selected,  and,  with  the  building  of  London  Bridge, 
the  Watling  Street  was  deflected  from  its  original 
course,  with  the  result  that  the  old  road  traversed 
the  Roman  city  from  Newgate,  at  its  northwestern 
extremity,  to  Bridgegate,  near  its  southeastern  end. 
Authority  for  this  statement  is  found  in  a  copy  of  an 
old  Saxon  charter  of  King  Edgar,  in  which  we  read 


INTRODUCTORY.  15 

of  a  broad  military  road  between  St.  Andrew's,  Hoi- 
born  and  Tyburn.  This  road  it  was  which  con- 
nected the  Watling  Street,  which  came  down  Edg- 
wrare  Road,  with  the  Watlmg  Street  which  crossed 
the  ancient  city. 

To  the  building  of  London  Bridge  the  city  owes 
not  only  its  earliest  prosperity,  but  also  possibly  its 
very  existence,  though  the  exact  period  at  which  it 
was  built  has,  as  we  have  said,  not  been  ascertained. 
It  is  probable  that  the  structure  consisted  at  first  of 
a  series  of  small  craft,  firmly  fastened  together,  over 
which  a  planking  of  some  sort  was  laid;  but  that  this 
floating  construction,  being  found  both  precarious  and 
unsafe,  for  it  was  substituted  a  more  permanent 
structure,  built  of  huge  trees,  laid  low  and  bound  to- 
gether at  the  extremities,  and  over  which  a  planking 
was  also  placed.  This  bridge  was  probably  that 
which  the  Romans  found,  and  which  they  rebuilt,  as 
we  shall  see. 

Such,  then,  was  the  condition  and  the  size  of  Lon- 
don when  Caesar,  prompted  by  a  desire,  as  he  puts  it, 
to  understand  the  political  institutions  of  the  island, 
know  the  number  of  its  inhabitants  and  study  their 
manner  of  warfare,  and  to  obtain  other  useful  infor- 
mation which  might  lead  ultimately  to  the  conquest 
of  the  island  and  the  subjugation  of  its  people,  first 
entered  Britain  in  55  B.C.,  and  by  his  invasion 
brought  the  "  barbarians  "  and  their  island  home  into 
the  pale  of  the  civilized  world. 


16  LONDON. 


CHAPTER    II. 

ROMAN   LONDON. 

Julius  Csesar  invades  Britain — Cassibellaun  Surrenders — Kymber- 
line — Second  Roman  Invasion  of  Britain  under  Aulus  Plautius 
— Submission  at  Camalodunutn — Defeat  of  Boadicea — Vespasian 
reduces  the  Brigantii — Julius  Agricola,  Prefect  of  Britain — De- 
scent of  the  Caledonians — Hadrian  arrives  in  Britain — Septimus 
Severus  defeats  Clodius  Albinus — Constantius  arrives  in  Britain 
— Death  of  Carausius — Constantius  enters  London — The  Mythic 
Coel  and  his  daughter  Helena — London  a  Military  Colony — A 
second  London  Bridge — Population  of  Roman  London — The 
Roman  Citadel,  or  Prsetorium — The  Basilica — The  Great  Roads 
— The  Suburbs,  Villas  and  Gardens — The  Building  of  London 
Walls — The  Introduction  of  Christianity  into  Roman  Britain — 
The  Legend  of  Lucius  and  the  Founding  of  St.  Peter  upon 
Cornhill— His  Death  at  Chur. 

As  we  have  seen,  the  first  Roman  invasion  of 
Britain  was  conducted  by  Julius  Caesar  in  person  in 
the  year  55  B.C.  It  is,  in  fact,  to  the  pen  of  this 
Roman  general  that  we  are  indebted  for  our  first 
knowledge  of  the  island.  We  have  seen  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter  in  what  condition  he  found  the  coun- 
try and  its  inhabitants.  Notwithstanding  the  supe- 
rior training  and  military  equipment  of  the  Roman 
legions,  to  say  that  he  met  with  success  would,  how- 
ever, be  to  indulge  in  flattery  as  gross  as  that  which 


ROMAN  LONDON.  17 

was  usually  the  basic  property  of  Roman  triumphs. 
Though  the  ambush  prepared  by  the  British  chief- 
tains and  their  subsequent  attack  on  the  Roman 
camp  failed,  yet  in  view  of  the  possible  interruption 
of  his  communication  with  Gaul  during  the  winter 
months,  which  would  have  left  him  without  supplies 
or  provisions  on  a  foreign  shore,  Csesar  was  quite 
willing  to  accept  the  illusory  promise  of  submission 
from  a  few  native  chiefs,  and  he  returned  to  Gaul 
after  a  stay  in  Britain  of  about  three  weeks.  It  is 
very  apparent  that  he  had  little  reason  to  boast  of 
the  success  of  his  expedition.  He  therefore  affects 
in  his  "  Commentaries "  to  consider  it  merely  in  the 
light  of  a  voyage  of  discovery.  In  Rome  the  mere 
invasion  was,  however,  regarded  as  the  forerunner 
of  great  victories,  and  a  thanksgiving  of  twenty 
days  was  ordered,  in  consequence,  by  the  Roman 
Senate. 

The  following  winter  was  spent  in  great  and  active 
preparations,  and  in  the  spring  of  54  B.C.  a  Roman 
army,  consisting  of  five  legions  and  two  thousand 
cavalry,  sailed  from  the  coast  of  Gaul  in  a  fleet  cf 
more  than  eight  hundred  ships.  Before  so  formidable 
an  armament,  the  Britons  retired  precipitately  to  the 
woods ;  the  invaders  landed  without  opposition,  and 
Ciesar  immediately  set  out  in  pursuit  of  the  natives. 
While  recalled  the  next  day  to  the  coast  by  the  news 
of  a  disaster  to  the  fleet,  caused  by  a  storm  which  had 
arisen  and  wrecked  a  number  of  the  Roman  ships,  the 
VOL.  I.-2 


18  LONDON. 

damage  was  soon  overcome,  the  remaining  ships 
dragged  up  beyond  the  reach  of  the  tide,  and  the 
expedition  into  the  interior  was  resumed  with  energy. 

Each  day  was  marked  by  some  encounter,  in  which 
the  natives  not  infrequently  obtained  the  advantage. 
It  was  their  policy  to  shun  any  general  encounter  in 
the  open  and  to  depend  on  ambush  and  strategy — 
always  the  resort  of  the  weaker  power.  When  con- 
fronted, however,  they  showed  no  lack  of  courage. 
Their  principal  warriors  fought  in  chariots,  and  the 
consummate  skill  with  which  they  guided  these  cum- 
bersome machines — on  the  brink  of  precipice,  hillside 
and  level  plain  alike — extorted  the  applause  of  the 
Romans  themselves.  No  danger  appalled  them. 
Driving  fearlessly  along  the  Roman  line,  they  took 
and  profited  by  every  opportunity  to  break  the  Roman 
ranks,  but,  when  despairing  of  success,  retired  with 
rapidity.  It  required  all  the  art  at  Caesar's  command 
to  inflict  any  permanent  injury  on  so  active  a  foe;  but 
the  occasion  finally  came  about,  and  in  consequence, 
the  British  forces  being  defeated,  most  of  the  con- 
federate chieftains  fled  into  the  interior,  leaving  on 
Cassibellaun,  king  of  the  Cassii  and  chief  of  the  allies, 
the  whole  burden  of  the  war. 

Repeated  success  at  arms  over  neighboring  tribes 
had  caused  Cassibellaun,  who  is  said  to  have  been  the 
younger  brother  of  the  mythical  Lud,  to  acquire  high 
renown  and  ascendency  over  the  whole  country.  The 
Cassii,  with  the  Dobuni,  were  themselves  established 


EOMAN  LONDON.  19 

on  the  left  or  northern  bank  of  the  upper  Thames, 
and  the  influence  of  Cassibellaun,  their  chief,  had 
come  to  be  distinctly  recognized  by  the  Trinobantes, 
who  occupied  the  left  bank  of  the  lower  Thames  and 
whose  chief  seat,  as  we  have  seen,  was  London.  The 
tribes  on  the  right  or  southern  bank  of  the  Thames 
had  also  invited  him  to  place  himself  at  their  head, 
and  thus  it  came  to  be  that  he  held  a  position  closely 
resembling  that  held  some  centuries  later  by  Egberht 
of  Wessex,  who,  having  subjugated  the  kings  of  the 
Heptarchy,  annexed  their  territory  and  made  himself 
master  of  all  England.  The  fact  that  it  was  the 
Trinobantes,  and  not  the  Cassii  themselves,  of  whom 
London  was  the  chief  seat,  and  that  Cassibellaun  was 
king  of  the  Cassii  and  not  of  the  first-named  tribe, 
would  seem  of  itself  to  dispose  of  the  mythical  story 
of  Lud,  from  whom  Cassibellaun  has  been  said  to 
have  inherited  his  kingship. 

Be  this  as  it  may,  Cassibellaun  had  attained  a  de- 
gree of  authority  over  all  the  tribes  of  the  district, 
which  practically  made  him  king  of  the  whole 
country,  and  he  had  established  his  headquarters,  it 
would  seem,  in  London  as  presenting  the  best  strategi- 
cal advantages.  When  the  Romans  advanced,  he  re- 
treated, ordering  a  spiked  palisade  to  be  erected  at 
the  only  ford  of  the  river ;  but  the  Romans  were  not 
to  be  retarded  in  their  march  northward  by  any  arti- 
ficial obstacles,  and  both  cavalry  and  infantry  man- 
aged to  get  across.  The  king  of  the  Cassii,  neverthe- 


20  LONDON. 

less,  was  not  to  be  discouraged.  He  ordered  the 
habitations  to  be  burned,  the  cattle  driven  away  and 
the  territory  laid  waste.  This  caused  great  anger 
among  the  Trinobantes,  who,  with  other  neighboring 
tribes,  now  sought  the  protection  of  Caesar,  and  led 
him  to  the  final  retreat  of  Cassibellaun,  situated  on  the 
spot  where  afterwards  Verulam  was  built  and  near  to 
the  site  of  the  present  town  of  St.  Albans.  The  de- 
fences, excellent  though  they  were,  were  soon  forced 
by  the  Romans,  and  Cassibellaun  was  at  length  obliged 
to  sue  for  peace.  The  result  was  an  agreement 
whereby  Rome  was  to  receive  an  annual  tribute  from 
Britain  and  by  which  the  commercial  relations  of  the 
two  nations  were  fixed.  Yet  Rome  remained  master 
of  not  even  a  foot  of  British  soil. 

From  that  period  to  the  reign  of  Claudius,  during  a 
lapse  of  ninety-seven  years,  the  British  retained  their 
original  independence.  Civil  discord  concentrated  the 
attention  of  the  Roman  world  upon  itself.  Britain  was 
therefore  left  in  peace.  In  this  interval,  we  are  told 
that  two  kings  rose  in  turn  to  the  position  of  chief  of 
the  allies,  and  were  practically  the  sole  sovereigns  of 
the  realm — Tenuantius  and  Kymberline,  of  whom 
mention  has  been  made  in  the  preceding  chapter. 
During  this  time  Britain  was  only  nominally  a  tribu- 
tary state.  Augustus  three  times  announced  his  in- 
tention of  annexing  Britain  to  the  empire,  but  a  sub- 
missive embassy  from  the  native  chiefs  appeased  and 
satisfied  the  imperial  pride  and  postponed  the  fulfill- 


ROMAN  LONDON.  21 

ment  of  the  plan.  Instead  of  exacting  the  tribute 
imposed  by  Csesar,  he  contented  himself  with  imposing 
duties  on  the  trade  between  Gaul  and  Britain.  Ti- 
berius, pretending  that  the  empire  was  already  too 
extensive,  excused  himself  thus  for  his  inaction  in  the 
matter ;  and  while  his  nephew,  Caligula,  indulged  at 
Boulogne,  then  Gesoriacum,  in  a  triumph  over  his 
imaginary  conquest  of  the  ocean,  yet  nothing  was 
achieved  towards  the  actual  conquest  of  the  island  and 
subjugation  of  the  British  until  Claudius  donned  the 
imperial  purple. 

Instigated  by  Beric,  a  British  chieftain,  whom  inter- 
necine feuds  had  driven  from  his  country,  Claudius 
commanded  Aulus  Plautius  to  transport  four  legions, 
with  their  auxiliaries,  to  Britain.  It  was  with  no 
small  difficulty  that  the  troops  could  be  persuaded  to 
embark  on  the  expedition ;  but  as  they  crossed  the 
channel  a  meteor,  moving  in  the  direction  of  the  fleet, 
was  seen,  and  held  to  be  an  augury  of  success. 

The  two  sons  of  Kymberline,  whom  Roman  his- 
torians call  Caractacus  and  Togidumnus,  but  whom 
British  chroniclers  denominate  Guiderus  and  Arvira- 
gus,  led  the  British  forces,  and,  adopting  the  policy 
of  Cassibellaun,  endeavored  to  harass  rather  than 
openly  repel  the  adversaries.  The  German  auxili- 
aries, better  fitted  for  such  warfare  than  the  Roman 
legionary  soldiers,  followed  the  Britons,  however, 
across  rivers  and  morasses,  and,  though  the  latter 
made  a  brave  resistance,  drove  them  across  the  Thames 


22  LONDON. 

to  the  northern  bank.  The  emperor  himself,  now  tak- 
ing command,  penetrated  as  far  as  Camalodunum,  now 
called  Colchester,  and  received  the  submission  of  the 
natives. 

Claudius,  before  his  departure  from  the  islands, 
placed  the  Roman  forces  under  Planting  and  Vespa- 
sian, an  officer  whose  merits  afterwards  won  for  him 
the  imperial  dignity.  Plautius  was  given  the  left 
bank  of  the  Thames,  in  which  division  London  was 
situated,  while  to  Vespasian  was  assigned  the  right 
bank  of  the  river.  In  order  to  repress  the  inroads  of 
the  northern  tribes,  he  caused  two  chains  of  forts  to 
be  erected,  one  in  the  north,  along  the  river  Avon, 
the  other  in  the  south,  along  the  banks  of  the  Severn. 
Thus  the  subdued  territory  was  gradually  moulded 
into  a  Roman  province,  and  when  the  Iceni  attempted 
to  throw  off  the  Roman  yoke  their  rebellion  was 
severely  punished. 

Ostorius  Scapula  was  the  successor  of  Plautius,  and 
was  in  turn  succeeded  as  Roman  legate  by  Anlus 
Didius,  who  was  followed  by  Veranius,  an  officer 
whose  early  death  made  way  for  Suetonius  Paulinus, 
and  it  was  during  the  latter's  absence  in  Anglesey, 
whither  he  marched  to  give  a  final  blow  to  Druid ic 
power,  that  Catus,  the  Roman  procurator,  seized  on 
the  patrimony  of  Prasutagus,  king  of  the  Iceni,  while 
Boadicea,  the  widow  of  the  late  king,  was  scourged 
as  a  slave  and  the  chastity  of  her  daughter  violated 
by  Roman  officers. 


EOMAN  LONDON.  23 

Boadicea  naturally  took  the  first  opportunity  for 
revenge,  and  soon  a  formidable  rebellion  against  Ro- 
man authority  was  in  progress — in  the  course  of  which 
Camalodunurn  (Colchester)  and  later  London,  which 
had  grown  under  Roman  rule  to  be  a  populous  and 
open  mart,  and  also  the  town  of  Verulam,  experienced 
sieges  and  suffered  serious  damage  from  battle  and 
plunder.  Suetonius,  who  had  retired  before  the  ad- 
vancing fury,  was  finally  obliged  to  turn  and  face  the 
enemy.  The  final  battle  was  terrible  in  all  its  details. 
The  Britons  were  collected  in  masses  around  their 
various  chieftains,  their  wives  and  children  occupied  a 
long  line  of  carts  and  carriages  in  the  rear,  and  the 
air  resounded  with  their  shrieks  and  imprecations. 
The  Romans,  who  stood  motionless  and  silent,  per- 
mitted the  Britons  to  approach,  and  then,  rushing  for- 
ward in  the  form  of  a  wedge,  overturned  and  scat- 
tered everything  within  reach.  The  losses  on  both 
sides  are  variously  estimated  at  between  seventy  and 
eighty  thousand,  and  Tacitus  is  certainly  justified  in 
comparing  this  with  the  greatest  former  victories  of 
the  Romans.  Completely  conquered,  the  surviving 
Britons  took  flight,  and  Boadicea,  who  had  led  them 
to  battle,  determined  not  to  outlive  so  terrible  a 
catastrophe,  and  ended  her  misfortunes  by  a  violent 
and  voluntary  death. 

If  the  splendor  of  the  victory  preserved  the  pres- 
tige of  the  Roman  arms,  it  did  not  end  the  war,  and 
Rome,  fearing  that  the  determined  obstinacy  of  the 


24  LONDON. 

Britons  was  due  to  the  too  great  severity  of  Suetonius 
Paulinus,  he  was  recalled,  and  under  his  three  suc- 
cessors, Turpilianus,  Trebellius  and  Bolanus,  the  Brit- 
ons, within  the  pale  of  the  Roman  forts,  were  gradu- 
ally subdued  and  made  to  submit  to  the  Roman  yoke. 
No  effort  was  made,  however,  to  reduce  that  portion 
of  Britain  which  lay  beyond  the  Roman  forts.  When 
Vespasian  assumed  the  imperial  purple,  he  com- 
manded Petilius  Cerealis  to  reduce  the  Brigantii. 
This  was  done,  and  Julius  Frontinus,  who  succeeded 
Petilius  as  governor  of  the  province  of  Britain,  added 
the  territory  of  the  Silurii  to  the  confines  of  the 
empire.  The  great  merits  of  these  generals  were  ob- 
scured, nevertheless,  by  the  greater  fame  of  the  suc- 
cessor of  Frontinus — that  is,  Julius  Agricola. 

When  that  commander  arrived  the  army,  which 
had  been  dismissed  and  was  in  its  winter  quarters, 
was  immediately  summoned  by  him  into  the  field, 
and  led  against  the  unsubmissive  Ordovicii,  whom  he 
completely  subjugated.  In  his  next  two  campaigns 
he  extended  the  limits  of  the  empire  to  the  banks  of 
the  Tay.  Tribe  after  tribe  was  forced  to  submit,  and 
a  line  of  forts  from  the  frith  of  Forth  to  that  of  the 
Clyde,  constructed  in  the  fourth  year  of  his  command, 
protected  the  province  of  Britain  from  the  inroads  of 
the  northern  barbarians.  Later,  however,  having  re- 
ceived the  submission  of  the  tribes  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  the  Forth,  Agricola  pushed  his  conquests 
along  the  eastern  shore.  His  final  expedition  was 


ROMAN  LONDON.  25 

against  the  Caledonians,  in  the  eighth  year  of  his 
command ;  but  while  a  victory  for  Roman  arms  was 
the  outcome,  the  results,  as  far  as  retention  of  territory 
was  concerned,  were  not  permanent. 

The  Roman  power  seemed  now  firmly  established 
throughout  the  island.  The  tribes  who  had  sub- 
mitted made  no  attempt  to  recover  their  independence, 
and  the  Caledonians,  temporarily  humbled  by  their 
last  defeat,  were  content  to  roam  about  unmolesting 
and  unmolested  in  their  native  forests.  Agricola,  if 
he  obtained  fame  as  a  subjugator  of  rebellious  people, 
deserves  even  greater  credit  for  the  impetus  which  he 
gave  to  the  development  of  the  country  in  the  arts  of 
peace.  The  successors  of  Agricola  followed  in  this 
his  example,  and  devoted  themselves  to  promoting 
public  tranquillity,  protecting  commerce  and  enforc- 
ing the  laws;  but,  though  they  possessed  a  certain 
spark  of  his  genius  as  regards  the  organization  and 
encouragement  of  the  peaceful  arts,  they  fell  far 
short  of  his  military  talent.  Hardly,  therefore,  had 
he  taken  his  departure,  than  the  Caledonians,  whom 
he  had  merely  temporarily  checked  in  their  career, 
commenced  again  to  attack  the  majesty  of  Rome. 
Crossing  the  line  of  forts  between  the  two  friths,  they 
succeeded  by  their  example  in  rekindling  the  flame 
of  rebellion,  and  in  arousing  again  the  independent 
spirit  of  the  subdued  tribes.  By  the  time  that  Had- 
rian ascended  the  throne,  the  condition  of  affairs  had 
become  so  serious  that  he  considered  it  necessary  to 


26  LONDON. 

appear  himself  in  Britain.  Whatever  tranquillity  he 
may  have  succeeded  in  establishing  was  again  dis- 
turbed during  the  reign  of  his  successor  Antoninus, 
who  appointed  Lollius  Urbicus  prefect  of  Britain. 
Hostilities  between  the  Caledonians  and  the  Romans 
became  now  a  matter  of  constant  occurrence,  and 
during  the  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius  assumed  truly 
imposing  and  threatening  proportions. 

Ulpius  Marcellus,  having  been  made  prefect  of 
Britain,  succeeded,  however,  in  once  more  restoring 
peace.  The  command  was  next  conferred  on  Clodius 
Albinus,  and  was  retained  by  him  through  the  re- 
mainder of  the  reign  of  Commodus,  and  also  through 
the  reigns  of  Pertinax  and  Julian,  while  he  received 
from  Septimus  Severus,  who  succeeded  the  latter  of 
these,  the  rank  of  Csesar,  with  the  result  that  the 
two  were  finally  brought  into  a  conflict  for  authority. 
The  battle  was  fought  in  Gaul,  and  the  victory  re- 
maining with  Severus,  he  caused  Albinus  to  be  be- 
headed, and  to  prevent  in  the  future  such  great  in- 
crease in  power  in  the  prefects  of  Britain,  he  divided 
the  island  into  two  commands,  bestowing  one  on 
Heraclianus  and  the  other  on  Virus  Lupus. 

His  presence  having  become  necessary  in  Britain, 
Septimus  Severus,  notwithstanding  his  advanced 
years,  undertook  the  long  journey,  accompanied  by 
his  two  sons,  Caracalla  and  Geta,  and  himself  led  the 
expedition  from  York  against  the  Caledonians. 
After  his  death  at  York  a  silence  occurs  in  the  his- 


KOMAN  LONDON.  27 

toiy  of  Britain  for  some  seventy  years.  We  may 
assume  therefore  that  these  years  were  peaceful,  or  at 
least  uneventful.  Internecine  warfare  and  civil  strife 
had  done  so  much  by  that  time  to  disintegrate  the 
forces  of  the  empire,  and  to  injure  Roman  prestige 
abroad,  that  the  Britons,  encouraged  by  the  possibility 
of  success,  began  again  their  attempt  to  regain  their 
independence.  To  chastise  and  restrain  their  in- 
subordination, the  command  of  a  great  fleet,  with  the 
title  of  Count  of  the  Saxon  Shore,  was  accorded  to 
Carausius  by  Diocletian,  and  Maximinianus.  The 
way  in  which  he  fulfilled  his  trust  is  well  known. 
Having  induced  both  the  army  and  the  fleet  to 
espouse  his  cause,  and  having  made  a  truce  with  the 
barbarians,  he  assumed  the  imperial  dignity  himself 
and  set  defiance  to  Rome. 

It  is  of  course  scarcely  to  be  supposed  that  the 
two  emperors  would  acquiesce  in  such  a  usurpation. 
They  entrusted  to  Constantius,  accordingly,  the  task 
of  wresting  Britain  from  the  hands  of  Carausius,  and 
as  he  made  his  residence  at  Boulogne,  it  was  here 
that  Constantius  commenced  his  attack.  Retiring  to 
Britain,  Carausius  made  a  bold  defence  of  what  he 
claimed  as  his  rights,  but  while  still  unconquered  by 
the  legion  of  Constantius,  he  fell  a  victim  to  domestic 
treachery,  being  murdered  at  York,  in  the  eighth 
year  of  his  reign,  by  Allectus,  a  general  who,  having 
abused  his  confidence,  feared  his  resentment.  Allec- 
tus now  assumed  the  crown  himself,  and  made  his 


28  LONDON. 

capital  at  Clausentum,  near  the  present  site  of  South- 
ampton. Constantius,  in  the  meantime,  was  collect- 
ing a  powerful  fleet,  which  he  divided  into  two 
squadrons,  keeping  one  at  Boulogne  under  his  own 
command,  while  he  placed  the  other  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Seine,  under  Asclepiodotus,  who  had  been  pre- 
fect of  Britain.  This  second  squadron  it  was  which 
put  forth  first,  and  effected  a  landing  on  the  south- 
ern coast,  near  the  Isle  of  Wight.  Constantius,  with 
the  first  squadron,  made  for  the  coast  of  Kent,  and 
on  landing  learned  of  the  defeat  and  death  of  Allec- 
tus,  who  had  been  overcome  by  the  superior  forces 
of  Asclepiodotus.  Nor  was  this  the  only  piece  of 
good  fortune  which  befell  Constantius,  for  a  portion 
of  his  squadron,  having  become  separated  from  his 
command,  entered  the  Thames,  and  advanced  without 
opposition  as  far  as  London.  The  city,  which  was 
on  the  point  of  being  plundered  by  a  band  of  auxili- 
aries, once  in  the  pay  of  Allectus,  was  saved  from 
this  impending  fate  by  the  arrival  of  the  Romans, 
and  Constantius  himself  was  on  his  entry  hailed 
as  liberator  and  deliverer,  and  proclaimed  emperor; 
but  he  did  not  long  survive  this  new  honor,  for  he 
was  shortly  after  taken  ill  at  York,  which  city  he 
had  selected  as  his  residence  because  of  its  better 
strategical  qualities,  and  died — this  being  in  A.D. 
306. 

According  to  the  chroniclers,  he  had  married  a  cer- 
tain Helena,  a  daughter  of  the  British  chief  or  king, 


EOMAN  LONDON.  29 

Coelgodebog;  while  Gibbon  and  other  historians  of 
note  make  her  out  to  have  been  a  native  of  Bithynia, 
and  of  humble  origin.  Whatever  may  be  the  truth 
concerning  her  parentage,  all  must  deplore  her  fate,  as 
Constantius,  on  attaining  the  rank  of  Caesar,  repudiated 
her  for  Theodora,  daughter-in-law  of  Maximianus. 
Helena  had,  however,  already  borne  him  a  son  in  the 
person  of  the  famous  Constantine,  a  prince  who,  by 
his  efforts  and  his  victories,  united  again  the  entire 
empire  under  his  sole  rule,  and  by  so  doing,  and  re- 
establishing the  prestige  of  the  imperial  authority, 
restored  peace  to  the  empire  and  the  provinces,  a  con- 
dition of  affairs  which  lasted  during  his  reign  and  that 
of  his  sons,  and  from  which  Britain  was  not  the  last 
to  benefit. 

Let  us  now  turn  our  attention  to  the  position  which 
London  occupied  at  this  time,  and  to  do  this  we  must 
first  glance  briefly  over  the  whole  system  of  the 
Roman  occupation,  in  regard  to  the  respective  status 
of  its  military  posts  and  civil  settlements.  Through- 
out the  country  were  scattered  a  large  number  of  civil 
settlements  and  military  posts,  the  names  of  which  are 
preserved  to  us  in  the  itineraries  of  Richard  and  An- 
toninus. Some  were  of  British,  some  of  Roman  origin, 
and  they  were  divided  into  four  classes,  gradually 
descending  in  the  scale  of  privilege  and  importance. 
The  first  rank  may,  perhaps,  be  said  to  have  been 
held  by  the  municipal  cities,  the  inhabitants  of  which 
enjoyed  the  rank  of  Roman  citizens,  possessed  the 


30  LONDON. 

right  of  choosing  their  own  decurions,  or  magistrates, 
and  enacting  their  own  laws,  and  were  exempt  from 
the  operations  of  imperial  statutes.  Privileges  so  ex- 
ceptional were  granted  with  great  reserve,  and  at  first 
Britain  could  boast  of  only  two  so-called  municipal 
cities,  Verulam  and  York.  The  "Jus  Latii"  or  Latin 
right,  as  it  was  called,  conferring,  as  it  did,  privileges 
more  partial  in  their  nature,  was  conferred  with  greater 
frequency,  and  was  enjoyed  by  ten  British  towns, 
namely:  Inverness,  Perth,  Dunbarton,  Carlisle,  Cat- 
terick,  Blackrode,  Cirencester,  Salisbury,  Caister  in 
Lincolnshire,  and  Slack  in  Long  wood.  These  also 
selected  their  own  magistrates,  who  resigned  at  the 
expiration  of  the  year,  and  claimed  upon  retirement 
that  privilege  which  was  the  height  of  all  provincial 
ambition,  the  freedom  of  Rome. 

Thirdly,  but  not  necessarily  of  less  dignity,  were 
the  so-called  colonies,  each  of  which  was,  as  it  were, 
a  miniature  representation  of  its  parent  city,  adopting, 
as  it  did,  the  same  customs,  and  being  governed  by 
the  same  laws.  In  Britain  there  were  nine  of  these 
establishments,  two  of  a  civil  and  seven  of  a  military 

•/ 

character.  These  were  namely:  Richborough,  Lon- 
don, Colchester,  Bath,  Gloucester,  Caerleon,  Chester, 
Lincoln  and  Chesterfield.  It  had  long  been  the  policy 
of  Rome  to  reward  her  veterans  with  gifts  of  land, 
portioned  out  of  that  of  the  conquered  nation,  and,  in 
return,  it  exacted  from  the  beneficiary  strict  allegiance 
and  specific  services.  Thus  we  find  a  great  similitude 


ROMAN  LONDON.  31 

to  the  feudal  tenure  of  the  Middle  Ages  in  the  consti- 
tution of  the  Roman  colonial  establishments.  While 
military  service  was  not  exacted  of  the  veteran  him- 
self, he  was  expected  to  enlist  his  sons  in  the  army  as 
soon  as  they  attained  to  years  of  manhood;  and  if 
they  refused  to  be  enlisted,  disgrace  and  imprison- 
ment, sometimes  even  death,  was  the  resulting  punish- 
ment. 

There  were,  besides  the  three  classes  already  enu- 
merated, a  fourth  class  of  towns  which  were  stipend- 
iary— that  is,  compelled,  as  is  indicated  by  the  term, 
to  pay  tribute — and  which  were  governed  by  Roman 
officers  appointed  by  the  praetor. 

With  the  gradual  abolition  of  class  distinctions  be- 
tween the  towns,  which,  commencing  under  Caracalla, 
continued  till  all  distinctions  were  practically  obliter- 
ated, and  the  freedom  of  Rome  extended  to  the  whole 
body  of  the  citizens,  those  towns  of  greater  commercial 
importance  rose  speedily  to  positions  of  dominant 
wealth  and  power,  and  London  itself  came  to  occupy 
a  place  of  high  importance.  It  had,  in  fact,  by  this 
time  become  a  large  and  prosperous  mart.  To  the 
settlement  of  primitive  British  huts  had  succeeded  a 
stone-built  Roman  city,  surrounded  by  an  endless  per- 
spective of  villas  and  gardens.  It  was  a  point  of  de- 
parture for  all  commercial  expeditions,  and  held 
important  relations  with  all  the  towns  of  the  interior, 
whether  to  the  north  or  south.  The  needs  of  such  a 
city  demanded  far  greater  transfluvial  communication 


32  LONDON. 

than  was  afforded  by  the  primitive  bridge,  the  con- 
struction of  which  had  been  accomplished  by  the  early 
Britons;  hence  a  new  and  more  important  bridge  over 
the  Thames  was  erected.  This  bridge  seems  to  have 
consisted  of  great  beams,  founded  on  piles,  over  which 
a  firm  and  substantial  flooring  was  laid.  This  floor- 
ing was,  however,  in  all  probability  not  perfectly 
joined,  and  the  discovery  of  a  continuous  series  of 
coins,  ranging  from  the  early  republican  period  to  that 
of  Honorius,  found  in  the  river  when  the  old  founda- 
tions which  had  served  for  the  mediaeval  bridge  were 
taken  up,  to  make  way  for  the  foundations  of  the 
present  structure  (which  coins,  it  is  supposed,  were 
used,  or  rather  intended,  for  toll-paying,  and  must 
have  accidentally  slipped  through  the  gaping  boards 
into  the  stream  beneath,  or  been  deliberately  thrown 
in  as  propitiatory  offerings  to  the  gods  of  the  river), 
gives  rise  to  the  theory  that  the  Roman  bridge  was  in 
existence  before  the  republican  coins  went  out  of  use. 
It  is  to  Tacitus  that  we  owe  the  first  distinct  men- 
tion of  London  by  name.  He  tells  us  that  Augusta, 
as  London  was  called  during  the  Roman  occupation, 
was  inhabited  by  merchants,  but  was  nevertheless 
undefended  by  ramparts,  \vhich  goes  to  show  that, 
although  it  was  a  town  of  commercial  importance,  it 
held  evidently  an  inconsiderable  place  in  military 
significance.  From  its  abandonment  by  Suetonius,  at 
the  time  of  the  rising  of  the  Iceni  under  Boadicea,  it 
may  be  inferred  that,  while  filled  with  Roman  mer- 


ROMAN  LONDON.  33 

chants,  it  was  not  exactly  a  Roman  colony,  and  was 
therefore  not  worth  the  risk  of  defending  it  against 
the  enemy.  And  the  risk  must,  indeed,  have  been 
great,  since  Tacitus  remarks  that  all  those  who,  on 
account  of  unwarlike  sex  or  old  age,  remained  in 
London  were  brutally  slain.  Indeed,  as  late  as  the 
days  of  Constantius,  we  find  that  emperor  selecting 
York  as  his  imperial  residence  because  of  its  greater 
military  protection. 

As  to  the  size  of  London  it  is  difficult  to  make  a 
proper  estimate.  Verulam,  Camalodunum  and  Lon- 
don, taken  together,  contained,  we  are  told,  a  popula- 
tion of  about  seventy  thousand  souls  at  the  time  of 
the  massacre,  from  which,  doubtless,  many  escaped; 
and  it  has  been  sometimes  assumed  that  London  alone 
probably  contained  some  thirty  thousand  souls.  After 
the  mention  made  by  Tacitus,  no  mention  of  London 
occurs  from  the  pen  of  any  Roman  author  for  some 
two  centuries.  It  is  necessary  to  turn  therefore  to  the 
result  of  excavations  and  other  similar  investigations 
to  throw  some  light  upon  the  subject. 

While  at  first  it  would  seem  as  though  the  Romans 
had  not  sufficiently  appreciated  the  opportunities 
which  London  presented  strategically,  as  well  as  com- 
mercially, and  had  only  a  small  fortified  town  here, 
consisting  of  a  fort  or  citadel,  commanding  the  bridge 
and  connected  probably  with  another  fort  at  South- 
wark,  of  two  ports  or  docks,  one  at  Billingsgate  and 
another  at  Dowgate,  and  of  a  ring  of  suburbs,  yet  it 
VOL.  I.— 3 


34  LONDON. 

was  not  long  before  they  came  to  recognize  these  ad- 
vantages, and,  after  the  rising  and  subjugation  of  the 
Iceni,  it  soon  became  both  a  populous  and  wealthy 
town. 

Of  the  Roman  buildings  it  is  possible  to  form  only 
an  approximate  idea.  They  were  doubtless  like  all 
Roman  buildings  of  the  period.  There  are  Roman 
forts  and  castles  still  standing  in  various  countries, 
from  a  knowledge  of  which  we  can  without  much 
difficulty  reconstruct  those  remains  of  Roman  build- 
ings, both  municipal  and  private,  which  have  been 
from  time  to  time  unearthed  in  the  reconstruction  of 
different  parts  of  the  city.  London  was  then,  as  it 
has  remained  to  the  present  day,  a  city  of  suburbs. 
The  Roman  garrison,  which  through  the  first  two 
centuries  of  Roman  occupation  could  not  have  been 
large,  was  confined  to  the  citadel,  around  and  outside 
of  which  were  grouped  suburban  villas  and  private 
residences.  The  citadel  itself  must,  however,  have 
been  a  vast  construction.  It  has  long  been  believed, 
and  recent  investigation  has  proved,  that  it  occupied 
a  site  which  can  best  be  defined  as  extending  from 
Walbrook  Street  to  Mincing  Lane,  and  having  its 
northern  boundary  where  Lombard  Street  now  is,  and 
its  water  front  on  what  is  now  the  line  of  Upper  and 
Lower  Thames  Street.  To  the  west,  the  fortress  rose 
to  towering  heights  from  the  banks  of  the  Walbrook 
itself,  while  to  the  north  and  east  it  was  defended  by 
ditches  filled  with  water.  The  walls  of  the  praetorium, 


ROMAN  LONDON.  35 

as  a  Roman  citadel  was  called,  must  have  been  enor- 
mously massive,  but  have,  nevertheless,  almost  entirely 
disappeared — the  construction  of  the  Cannon  Street 
terminus  having  destroyed  the  great  southwestern  bas- 
tion, and  a  vast  portion  of  the  eastern  wall,  which 
was  recently  exposed  to  view  in  Mincing  Lane,  hav- 
ing also  disappeared  under  modern  constructions. 

Within  the  fortress,  near  the  western  wall,  and 
therefore  near  where  the  Cannon  Street  terminus  now 
stands,  was  a  large  hall  or  basilica-like  structure,  with 
tesselated  pavement,  and  which  contained  within  its 
walls  the  residences  of  the  governor  and  the  Courts 
of  Justice.  With  the  exception  of  this  and  a  Roman 
bath,  near  where  the  church  of  St.  Magnus  now 
stands,  there  is  no  existing  trace  of  any  large  building 
within  the  walls  of  the  citadel — no  amphitheatre,  no 
great  temple — from  wrhich  we  may  assume  that,  up  to 
the  middle  of  the  third  century,  the  military  force  in 
London  was  not  large,  and  was  confined  absolutely 
within  the  fortifications  and  apart  from  the  mercantile 
and  native  population  of  the  suburbs. 

Two  great  streets,  known  in  Saxon  times  as  the 
Watling  Street  and  the  Eormen  or  Ermyn  Way, 
traversed  the  city  and  the  citadel  (the  former  coming 
from  the  northwest  and  the  latter  directly  from  the 
north),  and  meeting  at  the  market-place,  which  came 
to  be  called  East  Cheap  and  still  retains  the  name, 
led  to  the  bridge.  Here,  where  to-day  crowded  omni- 
buses, drays  and  private  carriages  roll  on  their  vari- 


36  LONDON. 

ous  and  multifarious  errands,  the  dark-skinned  slaves 
were  sold  to  British  merchants  in  exchange  for  chil- 
dren of  the  north,  who,  by  their  fair  skins  and  blue 
eyes,  had  attracted  the  attention  of  Roman  officials. 

Outside  the  fortress,  on  the  west,  as  has  been  pre- 
viously stated,  was  the  Walbrook  (Wallbrook).  The 
course  of  this  stream  turned  at  the  northwestern 
bastion,  and  lay  then  in  a  northeasterly  direction. 
Close  to  this  turn  was  evidently  some  kind  of  bridge, 
over  which,  through  what  was  probably  a  stately 
gate,  the  Watling  Street  crossed  to  the  other  side, 
known  as  Dowgate  side,  where  the  finding  of  the  re- 
mains of  rude  buildings  has  given  rise  to  the  theory 
that  on  the  heights  on  that  side  there  existed,  in  very 
early  times,  a  fishing  village.  The  banks  of  the  Wal- 
brook were  studded  with  villas  and  suburban  resi- 
dences, which  stretched  far  in  the  direction  of  Thread- 
needle  Street,  Cornhill  and  Bishopsgate.  It  is  about 
here  that  the  finest  remains  have  been  discovered, 
some  covered  with  thick  layers  of  black  ashes,  indi- 
cating the  fragile  character  of  wooden  houses  and  the 
frequency  of  destructive  fires.  Here,  in  their  gar- 
dens, the  society  of  the  day  talked  and  gossiped  while 
partaking  of  the  delicacies  of  the  period  ;  and  where 
Threadneedle  Street  now  witnesses  the  business  bustle 
of  the  world's  greatest  metropolis,  then  languishing 
lovers  rowed  on  the  moonlit,  rippling  waters  of  the 
Walbrook  or  gathered  flowers  on  its  grassy  banks. 

Such  was  the  London  of  the  Romans  for  at  least 


KOMAN  LONDON.  37 

two-thirds  of  the  Roman  occupation,  for  it  was  not 
until  after  Carausius  had  paid  for  his  treachery  with 
his  life,  Allectus  had  paid  for  his  assumptions  by  his 
defeat,  and  Asclepiodotus  had  won  for  Constantius  a 
decisive  victory  over  the  latter,  that  London  became 
in  truth  a  fortified  city,  and  that  walls  were  built 
which  completely  encircled  the  suburbs  and  the  town. 

Thus  it  came  to  be  that  that  network  of  villas,  or- 
chards and  cemeteries,  which  had  surrounded  the  Ro- 
man citadel,  became  itself  surrounded  by  the  Roman 
wall.  That  this  had  not  taken  place  when  Constantius 
landed  is  shown  by  the  fact  that,  notwithstanding  the 
hearty  welcome  which  he  received  from  the  people,  he 
preferred  to  make  York,  a  fortified  town,  his  head- 
quarters. 

Though  the  building  of  the  walls,  which  still,  in  a 
certain  sense,  define  the  city  boundaries,  is,  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  city,  an  event  second  to  none  save  the 
building  of  the  bridge,  yet  no  account  of  it  has  de- 
scended to  us,  nor  have  the  most  recent  researches 
thrown  light  on  this  most  important  subject.  All 
that  is  definitely  known  is,  that  in  350  A.D.  London 
had  no  walls  and  that  in  369  A.D.  the  walls  existed. 
The  walls,  which  resembled  those  of  other  Roman 
cities,  were  built  with  alternate  layers  of  stone  and 
brick.  It  extended  along  the  river  front  from  Black- 
friars  to  the  Tower,  and  in  its  other  boundaries  it  fol- 
lowed the  Fleet  from  the  Thames  to  Ludgate  Hill, 
there  deflecting  eastward,  and  a  little  further  taking 


38  LONDON. 

again  a  northerly  direction,  to  where  Newgate  allowed 
the  Watling  Street  to  emerge  from  the  city,  which 
great  highway  crossed  the  Fleet  at  Holborn  Viaduct. 
From  there  it  turned  again,  taking  a  northeasterly 
direction  between  where  St.  Bartholomew's  Hospital 
and  Christ  Hospital  now  stand,  forming  an  angle 
where  Aldersgate  was  subsequently  made,  and  turning 
north  again  for  a  short  distance,  and  then  east  to 
Bishopsgate — the  second  great  land  gate  of  the  city, 
which  gave  egress  to  the  Ermyn  Way.  Then,  slant- 
ing in  a  southeasterly  direction  and  passing  that 
place  where  Aldgate  was  opened  at  a  later  time,  it 
reached  the  Thames  at  the  exact  spot  where  the 
White  Tower  stands  to-day. 

On  the  river  front  the  wall  was  broken  in  three 
places: — at  Dowgate,  where  wras  the  mouth  of  the 
Walbrook  and  where  the  southwestern  bastion  of  the 
Roman  citadel  still  stood ;  at  Bridgegate,  at  the  foot 
of  London  Bridge,  and  again  a  little  to  the  eastward 
of  the  last  mentioned  and  to  the  westward  of  the 
Tower,  at  Billingsgate,  where  that  famous  market  now 
stands,  and  where,  according  to  tradition,  one  may  ex- 
pect to  hear  that  delicate  vernacular  of  the  fishwife 
which  bears  its  name.  The  road  from  the  bridge 
divided  at  East  Cheap,  the  Watling  Street  pursuing 
a  northwesterly  course  to  Newgate,  while  the  Ermyn 
Way  pursued  an  absolutely  northerly  course,  in  a 
line  parallel  with  the  present  Gracechurch  Street,  by 
Cornhill — which  name  probably  denotes  the  rural  con- 


A  "Beef  Eater/'  Tower  of  London 


ROMAN  LONDON.  39 

dition   in  which  the   Saxons  found  it — and  out  of 
Bishopsgate  to  Lincoln  and  York. 

Though  London  had  become  a  city  of  not  only 
commercial  but  also  strategical  importance,  it  was 
nevertheless  smaller  than  either  Verulam  or  York, 
and  does  not  seem  to  have  possessed  any  buildings  of 
public  interest  save  the  so-called  basilica,  already  re- 
ferred to,  which  part  of  the  citadel  or  praetorium  has 
been  described.  As  we  have  said,  there  was  neither 
amphitheatre  nor  temple  really  worthy  of  the  name. 
There  was  for  many  centuries  a  tradition  that  a 
temple  dedicated  to  Diana  had  once  stood  on  the  site 
of  St.  Paul's,  for  the  remains  of  which  Sir  Christo- 
pher Wren  made  search  when  building  the  founda- 
tions of  that  tremendous  edifice.  He  might  certainly 
have  spared  himself  the  trouble,  for  when  the  site  of 
St.  Paul's  was  first  brought  within  the  city  limits  by 
the  building  of  the  wall,  the  dynasty  of  Constantine, 
a  Christian  emperor,  occupied  the  throne  of  the 
Caesars,  and  it  is  hardly  probable,  even  though  pagan- 
ism was  not  yet  extinct,  that  a  new  edifice  devoted  to 
pagan  worship  should  have  been  erected ;  nor  is  it 
consistent  with  our  knowledge  of  Roman  methods  and 
manners  to  admit  the  possibility  of  the  existence  of 
such  a  temple,  in  so  unprotected  a  position,  outside  the 
city  walls.  The  fragments  of  stone  pavement  brought  to 
light  by  mediaeval  excavations,  and  which  at  the  time 
of  their  disinterment  were  supposed  to  be  the  remains 
of  such  a  temple,  are  now,  by  the  light  of  recent 


40  LONDON. 

excavations,  considered  more  probably  to  be  the  re- 
mains of  a  tesselated  terrace  pavement  once  belonging 
to  the  suburban  villas  which  in  the  Roman  days  lined 
the  banks  of  the  Walbrook. 

London,  or  Augusta,  as  the  Roman  city  was  called, 
was,  at  the  time  of  the  building  of  the  walls,  to  all 
intents  and  purposes,  a  Christian  city,  though  if  there 
is  lacking  evidence  of  the  existence  of  any  pagan 
temple  within  its  walls,  yet  is  there  none  of  the  pres- 
ence, up  to  the  time  of  Constantine,  of  any  place  of 
Christian  worship  or  burial  within  this  area.  In  view 
of  the  exceedingly  scant  material  which  we  have 
from  which  to  draw  our  conclusions,  it  is  in  fact  very 
difficult  at  this  distant  day  to  say  at  what  time  and 
by  whom  Christianity  was  first  preached  in  Britain, 
and  when  it  first  came  to  be  generally  adopted. 

The  story  that  St.  Peter  or  St.  Paul  personally  ap- 
peared in  Britain,  and  preached  there  the  gospel  of 
salvation,  cannot  be  said  to  rest  on  any  acceptable  his- 
torical evidence,  and  if  Christianity  did  exist  at  all 
in  the  early  Roman  days,  it  was  known  and  accepted 
but  by  a  very  few,  and  first  appeared  in  an  open  and 
recognized  form  under  Constantine,  the  son  of  Con- 
stantius,  and  the  first  Christian  emperor.  It  is  related 
by  some  that  Pomponia  Grsecina,  the  wife  of  the  pro- 
consul Aulus  Plautius  the  first,  who,  it  will  be  re- 
membered, made  a  permanent  conquest  of  Britain, 
and  Claudia,  the  British  wife  of  the  Senator  Pudens, 
were  Christians,  and  were  potent  factors  in  the  early 


EOMAN  LONDON.  41 

Christianizing  of  Britain.  It  is  also  possible  that 
the  authority  conferred  by  Claudius  on  Cogidimus, 
having  continued  in  his  family,  Lucius — who  was  one 
of  his  near  descendants,  and  who  was  in  truth  not 
king,  but  merely  one  of  the  petty  chieftains  of  Britain, 
and  as  such  probably  a  refugee  in  the  highlands  of 
the  interior — was  also  a  supporter  of  the  gospels,  and 
sent  Fagan  and  Dervan  to  Rome  as  ambassadors  to 
Pope  Eleutherius,  to  receive  ordination  from  him, 
and  that  on  their  return  by  their  preaching  they  were 
instrumental  in  sowing  the  seeds  of  Christian  worship 
on  British  soil ;  yet  the  legend  of  King  Lucius,  his 
founding  of  St.  Peter  upon  Cornhill,  and  his  subse- 
quent journey  to  Chur  in  the  cause  of  theological 
controversy,  must,  like  the  fables  of  Lear  and  of 
Lud,  be  relegated  to  historical  oblivion. 


42  LONDON. 


CHAPTER    III. 

SAXON    LONDON. 

Decline  of  Roman  Power  in  Britain— Arrival  of  Hengist  and  Horsa 
— The  Heptarchy — Saxon  Influence  on  London  Names — The 
Watling  Street— The  Ermyn  Way— Arrival  of  St.  Augustin  of 
Canterbury— Conversion  of  JJthelberht—  Building  of  St.  Paul's 
— Mellitus  first  Bishop  of  London — All  Hallows  (Barking) — 
Erkenwald — Bishopsgate — New  Gate — Lud  Gate — Alders  Gate 
—Cripple  Gate— Moor  Gate— Aid  Gate— St.  Peter's  (Thorny 
Isle)— St.  Gregory  by  St.  Paul's— St.  Faith's— St.  Peter  upon 
Cornhill— St.  Martins-le-Grand — St.  Andrew's  Undershaft— St. 
jEthelburgha— St.  Osyth— St.  Botolph  (London  Bridge)— St. 
Botolph  (Bishopsgate)— St.  Botolph  (Aldersgate)— St.  Michael 
upon  Cornhill — St.  Dunstan  in  the  East — St.  Magnus  the  Mar- 
tyr—St.  Stephen  (Wai brook)— St.  Swithin  (London  Stone)— St. 
Mary  ( Aldermary) — St.  Mary  Magdalene — St.  Mary  (Somerset) — 
St.  Peter  (West  Cheap)— St.  Mary  (Bothaw)— St.  Peter  (Paul's 
Wharf )— Holy  Trinity  the  Less— Egberht— Alfred  the  Great— 
The  Danish  Occupation— St.  Olave  (Hart  Street)— St.  Olave 
(Jewry)— St.  Olave  (Silver  Street)— St.  Edmund  the  King  and 
Martyr — The  Saxon  Restoration — jEthelred — Edward  the  Con- 
fessor— Westminster  Abbey — The  City  Life — West  Cheap — East 
Cheap— The  Dawn  of  the  Trade  Guilds— Customs  and  Manners 
of  the  Saxon  Period. 

THE  Roman  power  in  Britain  was  now,  however, 
nearing  the  final  end.  Under  Julian,  the  Picts  and 
the  Scots,  who  had  hitherto  been  classed  by  the 
Roman  writers  as  Caledonians,  emerged  from  the 


SAXON  LONDON.  43 

barbaric  obscurity  to  which  the  unsubjugated  tribes 
had  been  relegated,  and  distinguished  themselves  by 
frequent  inroads  into  Roman  territory.  So  formid- 
able were  their  expeditions  that  Lupicinus,  who  was 
sent  by  Julian  to  subjugate  them,  did  not  dare  to 
meet  them  in  the  open,  a  confession  of  weakness 
which  greatly  encouraged  their  audacity. 

During  the  reign  of  Valentinian  I.  things  went 
from  bad  to  worse,  and  became  even  more  alarming, 
and  depredations  continued.  The  empire  was  now 
divided;  Valens  occupied  the  throne  of  the  Eastern 
empire,  and  Valentinian  that  of  the  Western  empire. 
Theodosius  the  Elder,  on  being  sent  to  Britain  by 
the  latter  to  restore  order,  succeeded  in  part  in  his 
undertaking.  Gratian  succeeded  his  father  Valentin- 
ian L,  and  was  in  turn  succeeded  by  Valentinian  II. 
Meanwhile  the  rise  of  Maximus  in  Britain  had 
brought  about  other  complications.  The  murder  of 
Gratian  gave  him  possession  of  Gaul,  and  the  hurried 
flight  of  Valentinian  transferred  the  greater  part  of 
Italy  to  his  control.  Theodosius  the  Younger,  son  of 
the  "  deliverer  of  Britain,"  to  whom  Gratian  had  ac- 
corded imperial  honors  and  the  throne  of  the  Eastern 
empire,  appearing  now  on  the  scene,  gave  the  first 
shock  to  the  power  of  Maximus,  and  the  latter,  being 
shortly  after  stripped  of  his  imperial  ornaments,  was 
beheaded  by  his  victor,  leaving  the  Roman  empire 
once  more  united  under  the  now  undivided  rule  of 
Theodosius. 


44  LONDON. 

During  all  this  confusion  Roman  authority  in 
Britain  was  an  authority  in  name  only.  The  Picts 
and  the  Scots,  those  formidable  rivals  of  Roman  rule, 
were  not  unmindful  of  their  opportunities.  Their 
constant  depredations  compelled  the  Britons  to  peti- 
tion for  succor  from  the  imperial  court,  and  Stilicho 
was  dispatched  to  their  assistance  with  a  strong  body 
of  troops,  and  succeeded  for  the  time  being  in  repel- 
ling the  invaders,  and  in  confining  them  to  the  unan- 
nexed  territories.  But  the  mighty  edifice  of  Roman 
power  was  now  tottering  to  its  fall.  Hordes  of  bar- 
barians broke  through  the  barriers  of  the  Empire 
in  every  direction,  issuing  from  the  unknown  regions 
of  the  north  and  east,  and  devastating  the  most  pros- 
perous provinces. 

The  Goths  and  the  Vandals,  under  the  terrible 
Alaric,  had,  from  the  Julian  Alps,  pressed  down  on 
the  fertile  plains  of  the  Italian  peninsula.  It  was 
found  imperative  therefore  to  recall  the  troops  from 
the  extremities  of  the  empire  to  defend  the  seat  of 
power,  and  among  those  to  be  recalled  the  British 
troops  were  not  the  least  important.  Britain,  now 
unprotected  and  left  to  its  own  devices,  wras  the  scene 
of  terrible  civil  strife,  and  was  victimized  by  terrific 
inroads  by  the  Picts  and  Scots.  Unable  to  assist 
them,  the  unfortunate  Honorius,  from  his  palace  at 
Ravenna,  authorized  them  to  defend  themselves  as 
best  they  could — an  order  which  has  been  construed 
by  some  as  having  released  them  from  their  allegiance. 


SAXON  LONDON.  45 

Innumerable  petty  British  chieftains  now  arose  in 
every  direction,  and  ferocious  war  was  waged  amongst 
them.  Some  appealed  for  protection  to  .ZEtius,  the 
Roman  general  in  Gaul ;  others  sought  the  leadership 
of  the  famous  Yortigern,  the  most  powerful  of  the 
British  chiefs,  and  following  the  example  of  the 
Roman  emperors,  who  had  often  had  recourse  to  the 
hiring  of  menials  in  their  fights  against  the  British, 
Vortigern  and  his  allies  made  overtures  to  two  Saxon 
chiefs,  the  brothers  Hengist  and  Horsa,  to  aid  them 
in  their  battles  and  share  with  them  the  spoils.  These 
worthies  landed  at  Ebbsfleet  in  the  year  A.D.  449, 
and  were  quartered  in  the  Isle  of  Thanet. 

How,  from  having  been  in  the  beginning  merely 
the  paid  auxiliaries  of  the  chief  of  the  British  forces 
and  his  allies,  the  Saxons,  after  having  aided  in  driv- 
ing the  Picts  and  the  Scots  back  to  their  old  boun- 
daries, turned  on  the  British  themselves,  and,  having 
defeated  Vortigern,  and  subsequently  the  other  chiefs, 
possessed  themselves  of  the  greater  part  of  Britain, 
are  matters  of  common  knowledge.  Thus  came  about 
the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  Kent  by  Hen- 
gist  in  A.D.  455.  The  success  of  Hengist  stimulated 
the  ambition  of  other  Saxon  chiefs,  and  his  example 
was  soon  followed.  The  landing  of  zElla  at  Cymen- 
sore,  near  Withering,  in  the  Isle  of  Selsey,  and  the 
founding  by  him  of  the  kingdom  of  Sussex  in  A.D. 
489 ;  the  arrival  of  Cerdic  and  the  founding  by  him 
of  the  kingdom  of  Wessex  in  519;  the  founding  of 


46  LONDON. 

the  kingdom  of  Essex  by  Erkenwin  in  527,  and  that 
of  East  Anglia  by  Uffa  in  540;  the  fortifying  of 
Bebanburgh  Castle  by  Ida  in  547,  and  the  establish- 
ment by  him  of  the  kingdom  of  Bernicia  in  the  same 
year,  with  its  attendant  developments — namely,  the 
founding  of  the  kingdom  of  Deira  by  ./Ella  in  560, 
and  that  of  Mercia  by  Creoda  in  586 — these  are  events 
which  belong  to  the  history  of  England  and  the  Eng- 
lish people,  but  which  have  but  indirect  bearing  on 
the  development  and  history  of  England's  great  me- 
tropolis. 

It  is  necessary,  however,  to  understand  the  division 
into  which  Britain  had  fallen  at  the  time  of  which  we 
write,  when  the  fame  of  the  world's  greatest  city  was 
dawning  in  the  beginnings  of  Saxon  London.  Eight 
kingdoms  had  been  carved  by  the  barbarians  out  of 
the  Roman  province  of  Britain ;  Kent  and  Sussex 
comprised  only  the  territory  included  by  the  modern 
counties  of  these  names;  East  Anglia  comprehended 
Norfolk,  Suffolk,  Cambridge  and  the  Isle  of  Ely; 
Bernicia  and  Deira,  when  they  attained  their  fullest 
development,  extended  from  the  Forth  on  the  north  to 
the  Humber  on  the  south,  and  from  the  eastern  to  the 
western  coast ;  Wessex  was  bounded  by  the  Thames 
and  the  Severn  on  the  north,  and  stretched  from  the 
borders  of  Kent  and  Sussex  to  Land's  End  in  Corn- 
wall ;  Mercia  comprised  the  interior  of  the  island  as 
far  as  Wales,  and  Essex,  to  us  the  most  important, 
included  the  south  of  Hertfordshire,  the  modern 


SAXON  LONDON.  47 

county  of  Essex  and  Middlesex,  in  which  London 
itself  was  situated. 

If  we  alluded  in  the  last  chapter  to  the  extreme 
meagreness  of  the  data  which  we  have  at  our  disposal, 
from  which  to  work  up  an  account  of  Roman  London, 
we  can  but  deplore  in  even  stronger  terms  the  greater 
meagreness  which  exists  in  the  data  which  has  de- 
scended to  us  as  our  heritage  of  Saxon  London.  The 
Roman  legions  were  withdrawn  from  London  in  A.D. 
410.  We  find  the  East  Saxons  in  London  in  A.D.  609. 
Between  these  dates  we  have  no  knowledge  of  the  city. 
Eventful  though  these  intervening  years  undoubtedly 
were  in  the  history  of  Britain,  we  have  no  record  of 
them,  and  but  one  mention  of  the  city,  which  refers 
merely  to  the  refuge  taken  within  London's  protecting 
walls  by  the  fugitives  from  Kent,  after  the  famous 
battle  of  Crayford,  in  A.D.  457.  With  this  event  the 
Augusta  of  the  Romans  makes  her  last  appearance. 
When  we  next  hear  of  her  she  has  become  the  Lon- 
don of  the  Anglo-Saxon  period. 

During  all  this  time,  however,  events  of  tremendous 
magnitude  were  occurring  throughout  the  land.  The 
Angles  and  the  Saxons  were  pouring  over  the  country, 
and  half-Romanized  cities  were  yielding  everywhere 
to  the  invaders,  and,  where  they  submitted  peaceably, 
were  being  slowly  and  deliberately  Anglo-Saxon i/ed, 
while  those  that  resisted  were  promptly  reduced  to 
terms  by  fire  and .  massacre.  What  Britain  suffered 
when  Roman  arms  were  making  themselves  felt  in  the 


48  LONDON. 

land  can  have  been  nothing  compared  to  the  suffering 
inflicted  upon  Roman  Britain  during  the  Anglo-Saxon 
conquest.  The  Roman  conquest  was  that  of  civiliza- 
tion— pagan,  to  be  sure,  yet  the  best  that  the  day  af- 
forded— over  ignorance  and  barbarism;  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  conquest  that  of  barbarism  and  violence  over  a 
legal  and  orderly  government.  Nevertheless,  it  is  to 
this  very  conquest  that  England  owes  its  national 
character  and  present  greatness.  That  such  a  con- 
quest and  transformation  should  have  been  so  com- 
pletely accomplished  is  in  itself  a  marvel,  but  that  the 
conquest  of  Essex  and  Middlesex,  and  especially  of  a 
great  walled  city,  as  London  had  then  become,  should 
have  taken  place  without  leaving  the  slightest  histori- 
cal record  of  the  achievement  is  perhaps  even  more 
extraordinary.  "  No  territory,"  exclaims  one  of  the 
greatest  of  historians,  "  ever  passed  so  obscurely  into 
the  possession  of  an  enemy  as  the  north  bank  of  the 
Thames." 

London,  when  she  next  appears  to  us,  does  so  in  the 
full-fledged  capacity  of  the  capital  of  a  Saxon  king- 
dom. The  invaders  of  Roman  Britain  are  divided  by 
the  chroniclers  into  Old  Saxon,  Angles  and  Jutes ; 
but  white  we  are  told  that  from  the  Old  Saxons  came 
the  men  of  Sussex  and  Wessex,  yet  of  the  actual  con- 
querors of  Essex  and  of  London  we  hear  nothing. 
Of  their  progress  we  have  no  record,  and  in  A.D.  604 
we  find  them  in  full  and  complete  possession  of  the 
city.  The  Britons  left  in  London  must  have  indeed 


The  Crown  Jewels,  Tower  of  London 


SAXON  LONDON.  49 

been  few.  r  With  a  single  exception  of  Dow-Gate,  the 
first  syllable  of  which  is  probably  Celtic,  none  of  the 
local  names  survive.  The  great  streets,  whatever  may 
have  been  their  previous  appellations,  came  to  be 
known  as  the  Watling  Street  and  the  Ermyn  Way. 
The  market-places  were  called  East  Cheap  and  West 
Cheap,  while  the  ports  were  known  as  Ludgate  and 
Billingsgate.  Nor  did  the  streets  of  Saxon  London 
follow  in  exact  direction  those  of  the  Roman  city. 
There  seems  to  be  little  doubt  that  the  northern  road, 
later  known  as  the  Ermyn  Way,  emerged  from  the 
Roman  city  at  a  point  considerably  east  of  the  Saxon 
and  mediaeval  Bishopsgate;  nor  did  the  west  road, 
later  known  as  the  Watling  Street,  enter  the  city  at 
the  exact  point  at  which  New  Gate  was  later  con- 
structed. 

The  history  of  London  at  this  period  is  in  reality 
the  history  of  the  fight  between  Christianity  and  the 
new  paganism,  for  whatever  had  existed  in  the  way 
of  Christian  worship  during  the  Roman  occupation 
had  long  since  been  obliterated  by  the  then  governing 
people,  and  England,  which  had  been  called  upon  for 
a  century  or  more  to  worship  under  the  priests  of  a 
new  and  a  northern  mythology,  now  turned  once  more 
to  the  Christian  Church — that  sole  guide  to  all  true 
civilization.  How,  it  will  be  asked,  did  such  a  change 

*  *  Q 

come  about  ?     The  reply  is  easy.     In  the  midst  of 
internecine  strife  and  constant  civil  wars  there  ruled  a 
king    in    Kent,  JEthelberht   by   name,  who   for   his 
VOL.  I.— 4 


50  LONDON. 

sagacity  and  wisdom  deserves  the  same  place  among 
statesmen  that  his  piety  has  given  him  among  saints. 
Instead  of  seeking  distinction  in  the  widening  of  his 
overlordship,  he  sought  the  welfare  of  his  people  by 
his  continued  and  ceaseless  efforts  to  renew  the  inter- 
course, commercial  and  otherwise,  which  had  pre- 
viously existed  between  Britain  and  the  continent  of 
Europe.  To  further  his  plans,  he  determined  upon 
an  alliance  by  marriage  with  the  Princess  Bercta, 
daughter  of  Charibert,  king  of  the  Franks.  This 
union,  which  proved  itself  by  its  consequences  one  of 
the  most  potent  in  shaping  the  course  of  history,  had 
far  more  important  results  than  even  JEthelberht  could 
possibly  have  foreseen ;  for,  besides  cementing  the  com- 
mercial relations  of  the  two  countries,  it  brought  Eng- 
land and  the  English  people  once  more  within  the 
circle  of  the  Christian  Church. 

Bercta,  like  her  Frankish  kinsfolk,  was  a  Christian, 
and  a  Christian  bishop  travelled  in  her  train  from 
Paris  to  Canterbury,  which  was  then  the  royal  city  of 
the  Kentish  kingdom,  where  the  ruined  church  of  St. 
Martin  was  given  them  for  their  worship.  Nor  is 
this  all ;  for  the  illustrious  pontiff  who  then  occupied 
the  Chair  of  Peter,  and  who  has  been  justly  desig- 
nated Gregory  the  Great,  saw  in  this  marriage  the 
hand  of  God  held  out  in  mercy  to  an  unenlightened 
people.  It  was  an  opportunity,  he  felt,  not  to  be 
sacrificed.  Sending  at  once,  therefore,  for  Augustin,  a 
Roman  abbot  of  that  day,  he  instructed  him  to  go  to 


SAXON  LONDON.  51 

England  with  a  band  of  monks,  and  there  to  preach 
the  gospel  of  the  living  God. 

Many  years  before,  Gregory,  then  a  young  deacon, 
had  noticed,  it  is  related,  the  white  bodies  and  fair 
faces  and  golden  hair  of  some  youths,  who  stood 
bound  in  a  Roman  market-place  to  be  sold  as  slaves. 
Asking  from  whence  they  came,  "  From  Anglia  "  was 
the  reply.  "  Not  Angles,  but  angels,"  replied  Greg- 
ory. "  And  from  what  country  come  they  ?"  "  From 
Deira,"  said  the  merchants.  "  De  ira !"  exclaimed 
Gregory ;  "  aye,  plucked  from  God's  ire  and  called  to 
Christ's  mercy."  And  when  to  his  question  as  to  the 
name  of  their  king  they  told  him  that  it  was  ^Ella, 
Gregory  seized  upon  the  word  as  a  good  omen,  and 
cried  out :  "  Alleluia  shall  be  sung  there !"  And  he 
kept  his  word.  Augustin  was,  as  we  have  seen, 
promptly  dispatched  to  Kent,  and,  with  his  mission- 
aries, landed  at  Ebbsfleet,  on  the  very  spot  where 
Hengist,  with  his  warriors,  had  landed  more  than  a 
century  before.  ^Ethelberht  received  them  sitting  en- 
throned in  the  open  air  on  the  chalk  down  above  Min- 
ster, from  which,  miles  away,  the  eye  catches  glimpses 
of  the  towers  of  Canterbury,  to  which  place  the 
missionaries  then  proceeded. 

Having  entered  the  city  in  solemn  procession,  Can- 
terbury, the  first  royal  city  of  Saxon  England,  became 
also  the  centre  of  Christian  influence.  Latin  became 
again  one  of  the  tongues  of  Britain — the  language  of  its 
worship,  and  its  literature  and  philosophic  thought. 


52  LONDON. 

Nor  were  the  influences  of  Christianity  long  in  making 
themselves  felt  throughout  the  land,  although  it  is  much 
to  be  feared  that  the  people  of  London  did  not  take 
kindly  to  this  change  of  gods,  as  the  readoption  of  the 
Roman  religion  was  not  unassociated  in  their  minds  with 
the  idea  of  Roman  servitude.  Christianity  had,  never- 
theless, come  to  stay,  and  Bede,  whose  authority  is  cer- 
tainly equal  in  trustworthiness  to  that  of  the  early 
chroniclers,  tells  us  that  JEthelberht,  being  himself 
converted,  not  only  ordered  them  to  relinquish  the 
worship  of  their  own  divinities,  but  established  Mel- 
litus  as  Bishop  of  London,  causing  to  be  built  for  him 
the  church  of  St.  Paul,  on  the  very  spot  where,  it  has 
been  maintained,  a  temple  dedicated  to  Diana  in  the 
early  Roman,  and  a  Christian  place  of  worship  in  the 
latter  Roman  days,  existed.  The  year  of  this  mo- 
mentous event  is  A. D.  610,  and  this  is  the  first  authen- 
tic mention  of  the  church  which  was  the  precursor  of 
the  present  St.  Paul's  Cathedral.  The  right  of 
JEthelberht  to  interfere  thus  in  the  affairs  of  his 
neighbors — for  London  was,  properly  speaking,  in 
the  kingdom  of  Essex,  the  Thames  being  the  natural 
boundary  which  divided  that  kingdom  from  the  king- 
dom of  Kent — has  indeed  been  a  matter  of  surprise, 
but  it  is  perhaps  explicable  by  the  conversion  of  Se- 
berht,  king  of  Essex.  To  this  king,  indeed,  is  attrib- 
uted the  erection  of  the  church  or  chapel  of  St.  Peter 
in  A.D.  616  on  the  low  ground  of  the  left  bank  of  the 
Thames,  then  overgrown  with  thorns  and  surrounded 


SAXON  LONDON.  53 

with  water,  and  therefore  called  Thorny  Isle,  and  on 
which  spot  Westminster  Abbey  now  stands.  It  does 
not  seem,  however,  that  the  London  mission  flour- 
ished ;  for,  on  the  death  of  Seberht  and  the  removal 
of  Mellitus  to  the  See  of  Canterbury,  in  which  See  he 
succeeded  Lawrence,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the 
people  of  London,  if  not  their  rulers,  seem  to  have 
relapsed  into  paganism. 

It  is  difficult,  indeed,  to  say  who  their  rulers  were 
at  this  time.  It  was  a  period  of  desperate  struggles 
and  fights.  The  possession  of  London  seems  to  have 
been  a  matter  not  only  of  rivalry,  but  of  uncertainty ; 
for  it  does  not  appear  that  the  men  of  Wessex  suc- 
ceeded in  possessing  themselves  of  the  city,  even  after 
their  victory  over  the  East  Saxons.  In  fact,  when 
we  next  hear  of  London,  some  fifty  years  later,  it  is 
subject  to  Northumbria ;  for,  while  Sigeberht,  king  of 
Essex,  who  had  been  converted  to  Christianity,  invited 
Cedd,  brother  of  St.  Chadd,  to  preach  to  the  heathen 
of  Essex,  he  had  his  quarters,  several  miles  down  the 
river,  at  Tilbury.  Cedd  was  consecrated  Bishop  of 
London  in  654  at  Lindisfarne.  When,  after  ten  years, 
his  episcopate  closed,  London  was  no  longer  in  the 
power  of  Northumbria,  but  had  passed  into  that  of 
Mercia;  and  Bede  tells  us  that  Wina,  a  West  Saxon 
bishop,  being  expelled  from  Winchester,  took  refuge 
in  Mercia,  and  purchased  from  Wulfhere,  king  of 
that  country,  the  bishopric  of  London.  Shortly  after 
this,  we  find  that  Sighere,  king  of  Essex,  and  all  his 


54  LONDON. 

followers,  seceded  from  the  church  of  Wina,  and  re- 
turned once  more  to  their  old  form  of  worship;  and 
though  we  have  good  reason  to  believe  that,  London 
being  then  under  the  rule  of  Mercia,  the  inhabitants 
of  that  city  were  not  among  the  seceders,  yet  they 
must  have,  in  a  measure  at  least,  been  influenced  by 
such  an  important  proceeding. 

It  was  under  these  conflicting  and  unfavorable  cir- 
cumstances, therefore,  that  London  was  Christianized. 
If  Sighere  was  unfaithful  to  the  cause,  his  cousin  and 
colleague,  Sebbi,  was  piously  inclined,  and  his  name 
is  interesting  to  the  student  of  London  history,  be- 
cause of  a  charter  relating  to  a  grant  of  some  land  by 
a  member  of  the  then  reigning  family,  a  certain 
^Ethelred,  to  Barking  Abbey.  This  famous  Benedic- 
tine Nunnery  was  situated  at  the  east  end  of  a  road, 
now  Great  Tower  Street,  near  the  spot  on  which, 
during  the  Norman  period,  the  Tower  itself  was 
erected;  and  dependent  on  the  abbey  was  the  church 
of  All  Hallows,  one  of  the  most  ancient  foundations 
in  London,  now  known  as  All  Hallows,  Barking,  in 
Tower  Ward.  The  document  above  referred  to  is  the 
earliest  Saxon  document  of  its  kind,  and  is  now  pre- 
served among  the  manuscripts  of  the  British  Museum. 
The  distinctive  title  of  "Barking"  was  added  by  the 
abbess  of  the  Abbey  of  Barking,  in  Essex,  to  whom 
the  vicarage  of  All  Hallows  belonged.  Richard  I. 
added  a  chapel,  and  Edward  I.  caused  the  statue  of 
Our  Lady  of  Barking  to  be  erected.  The  chapel  was 


SAXON  LONDON.  55 

rebuilt  by  Eichard  III.,  and  also  a  college,  which  was 
suppressed  and  pulled  down  in  the  second  year  of 
Edward  VI. 

The  church  had  a  narrow  escape  in  the  great  fire, 
the  dial  and  porch  being  burned.  Its  neighborhood 
to  the  Tower  is,  perhaps,  the  explanation  of  the  inter- 
ment therein  of  many  of  those  who  suffered  execution 
on  Tower  Hill.  Thus  the  headless  body  of  Henry 
Howard,  Earl  of  Surrey,  Bishop  Fisher  and  Arch- 
bishop Laud  were  buried  here,  though  since  removed. 
There  is  a  fine  Flemish  brass  to  Andrew  Evyngar ; 
but  a  more  interesting  one  is  that  to  William  Thynne, 
clerk  of  the  kitchen  to  Henry  VIII.  and  editor  of 
Chaucer's  works.  The  cover  of  the  font  is  of  carved 
wood,  by  Grinling  Gibbons.  But  the  church  is  par- 
ticularly interesting  as  that  in  which,  on  October  23, 
1644,  William  Penn,  the  founder  of  Pennsylvania, 
was  baptized,  and  from  the  fact  that  it  was  also  the 
scene,  on  July  26,  1797,  of  the  marriage  of  John 
Quincy  Adams,  sixth  President  of  the  United  States, 
to  Louisa  Catherine  Johnson. 

Under  Erkenwald,  the  fourth  to  wear  the  mitre 
of  the  See  of  London,  the  scandal  connected  with  the 
simoniacal  election  of  Wina  was  soon  forgotten,  and 
the  church  may  be  said  to  have  finally  taken  root 
during  his  episcopate.  He  exerted  his  influence  and 
energies  not  only  in  the  spread  of  Christian  doctrine, 
but  in  endeavors  to  regain  for  London  the  place  which 
it  once  held  as  a  city  of  importance.  For  this  pur- 


56  LONDON. 

pose  he  caused  the  wall,  which  had  fallen  into  a 
ruinous  condition,  to  be  repaired,  and  built  the  gate 
which  has  since  borne  the  name  of  Bishopsgate. 
This  gate  is  that  which  gave  egress  from  the  city  to 
the  Ermyn  Way,  the  great  northern  road ;  and  while 
a  gate  had  existed  near  this  place  in  Roman  days, 
the  Saxon  gate  was  placed  considerably  to  the  west 
of  the  Roman  gate.  There  were,  however,  several 
other  modes  of  egress  to  the  city:  that  nearest  the 
Thames,  and  which  has  been  held  to  be  the  most 
ancient  of  the  city  gates — tradition  ascribing  its  erec- 
tion to  the  mythical  Lud,  in  consequence  of  which  it 
had  been  accorded  the  name  of  Ludgate — and  three 
other  gates,  Newgate,  Aldersgate,  Cripplegate,  and 
Moorgate,  the  latter  a  species  of  postern.  That  Lud- 
gate is  not  the  most  ancient  of  the  city  gates  is  evi- 
dent from  the  fact  that  it  must  have  led  only  into  a 
countiy  lane  skirting  the  Fleet,  for  the  road  between 
the  city  and  Westminster  lay  in  Saxon  times,  and  up 
to  a  very  much  later  period,  through  Holborn,  and 
not  along  the  river.  It  is  probable,  therefore,  that 
Newgate  held  that  honor,  for  it  gave  egress,  even  in 
Roman  days,  to  the  great  road  afterwards  named  the 
Watling  Street,  and  which  road  was  the  principal  way 
followed  by  travellers  and  merchants  from  the  north 
and  western  country  in  entering  the  city,  and  by  those 
who,  seeking  to  cross  the  Thames  by  London  Bridge, 
were  compelled  to  cross  the  city  in  order  to  do  so. 
The  name  of  Newgate  is,  in  all  likelihood,  explained 


SAXON  LONDON.  57 

by  the  fact  that,  the  old  Roman  gate  having  fallen 
into  disrepair,  a  new  gate  was  erected  on  the  same 
site  in  Saxon  times. 

Aldersgate,  so  called  because  of  its  antiquity,  it 
having  been  one  of  the  first  four  gates  of  the  city,  was, 
next  to  Bishopsgate,  the  most  important  northerly 
exit  from  the  city,  and  its  erection  greatly  eased  the 
traffic  which  had  to  crowd  through  Newgate,  for  the 
Watling  Street  bifurcated  at  the  principal  open  place 
of  the  city — where  met  the  Folkmote — and  its  most 
northerly  division,  passing  by  the  church  of  St. 
Martin,  later  called  St.  Martins-le-Grand,  sought 
egress  by  way  of  Aldersgate.  Another  northerly 
exit  was  Cripplegate,  not  far  distant,  and  which  was 
situated  at  the  end  of  Wood  Street.  This  gate,  origin- 
ally a  postern,  led  to  the  Barbican,  then  a  fortified 
watch  tower,  in  advance  of  the  city  walls.  It  owed 
its  name,  not,  as  has  been  supposed,  from  the  fact  that 
cripples  gathered  there  to  seek  alms,  but  from  the 
Anglo-Saxon  word  "crepel"  or  "crypele,"  meaning 
a  den  or  passage  underground ;  for  the  road  between 
the  postern  and  the  burghkenning  ran  between  two 
low  walls,  most  likely  of  earth,  which  formed  what 
in  fortification  would  be  described  as  a  covered  way. 
About  one  thousand  feet  to  the  east  of  Cripplegate 
was  another  postern,  which  came,  in  Plantagenet 
times,  when  a  gate  was  erected  there,  to  be  known  as 
Moorgate,  from  the  fact  that  it  led  to  the  Moorfields, 
without  the  walls,  to  the  north  of  the  city.  Aldgate, 


58  LONDON. 

a  gate  in  the  city  wall  toward  the  east,  and  between 
Bishopsgate  and  the  Thames,  was — though  according 
to  many  authorities  called  Aldgate  from  its  antiquity — 
in  reality  of  later  origin,  there  being  no  evidence  of 
its  existence  in  Saxon  times.  Four  other  gates, 
Bridgegate,  which  gave  egress  to  travellers  going 
south  over  London  Bridge,  Dowgate,  Ebbgate  and 
Billingsgate,  pierced  the  city  walls  on  the  river 
side. 

All  these  gates,  save  perhaps  the  three  last  men- 
tioned, came  in  time  to  be  monumental  structures, 
though  their  beauty  and  symmetry  mast  have  been 
greatly  impaired  from  the  fact  that  over  each  gate 
were  chambers  and  buildings  used  either  as  public 
prisons  or  private  dwellings.  Thus  Newgate  is  men- 
tioned as  early  as  1188  as  a  prison  for  felons  and 
debtors,  while  the  lodgings  over  Aldgate  in  1374 
were  leased  to  Geoffrey  Chaucer  for  the  term  of  his 
natural  life.  Newgate,  which  had  fallen  into  disrepair, 
was  rebuilt  under  Henry  I.,  but  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  enlarged,  and  so  noisome  and  crowded 
were  its  upper  tenements  that  during  the  epidemic  of 
plague,  in  1414,  the  gatekeeper  and  sixty-four  of  the 
prisoners  died  of  the  scourge.  Finally  it  was  decided 
to  rebuild  it,  and  to  remove  the  prison  to  an  adjoin- 
ing structure.  This  was  effected  through  the  efforts 
and  largely  through  the  munificence  of  Richard 
Whytyngton,  though  the  Newgate  was  still  un- 
finished when  he  died  in  1425.  The  Newgate,  which 


SAXON  LONDON.  59 

was  quite  a  monumental  affair,  was  adorned  on  the 
outer  or  western  side  by  four  statues — Liberty,  who, 
in  honor  of  the  departed  Whytyngton,  was  depicted 
as  having  his  famous  cat  lying  at  her  feet;  Peace, 
Plenty  and  Concord ;  while,  in  the  inner  or  eastern 
side,  it  was  ornamented  by  three  statues — Justice, 
Mercy  and  Truth.  The  structure  was  destroyed  by 
the  great  fire  in  1666,  but  rebuilt  in  1672. 

From  the  fact,  presumably,  that  Bishopsgate  was 
built  under  the  auspices  and  largely  from  funds  pro- 
vided by  Erkenwald,  it  was  held  that  the  repair  of 
the  gate  devolved  naturally  upon  his  successors  in 
the  See  of  London.  This  burden,  however,  was  one 
of  which  they  soon  rid  themselves,  and  the  real  bur- 
den and  expense  fell  upon  the  shoulders  of  the  Hanse 
merchants,  who  caused  it  to  be  finally  reconstructed  in 
1417.  It  was  taken  down  in  1731,  and  a  larger  but 
less  ornamental  structure  erected  in  its  stead  the  fol- 
lowing year.  Ludgate,  of  which  the  true  derivation 
seems  to  have  been  from  "Lode" — a  sewer  empty- 
ing into  a  bigger  stream,  probably  the  Fleet,  which 
emptied  into  the  Thames,  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
quite  so  elaborate  an  affair,  though,  when  it  was  re- 
built at  the  time  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  statues  of  the 
mythical  Lud  and  his  two  sons  were  placed  on  its 
eastern  side,  while  its  western  side  was  adorned  by  a 
statue  of  Queen  Elizabeth  herself.  When  the  gate 
was  finally  taken  down,  these  were  sold  by  the  city  to 
Sir  Francis  Gosling,  who  destined  them  for  the  east 


GO  LONDON. 

end  of  the  church  of  St.  Dunstan  in  the  West.  This 
absurdity,  however,  was  not  achieved,  and  the  statues 
of  Lud  and  his  progeny  eventually  found  their  way 
to  the  ash-heap,  though  that  of  Queen  Elizabeth  fared 
a  better  fate,  and  a  special  niche  was  made  for  it  on 
the  outside  of  St.  Dunstan's  Church. 

Aldersgate  was  several  times  rebuilt,  finally  in 
1617  from  a  design  by  Gerard  Christmas.  Through 
it,  James  I.,  who  had  waited  for  well  nigh  a  year  the 
abatement  of  the  plague  at  the  Charterhouse,  outside 
the  walls,  entered  the  city  when  he  came  to  take  pos- 
session of  his  new  dominion.  It  suffered  greatly  dur- 
ing the  great  fire,  but  was  rebuilt,  and  here  the  heads 
of  several  of  the  regicides  were  exposed  for  public 
derision  and  abhorrence. 

Of  Cripplegate  and  Moorgate  there  is  little  to  be 
said.  The  latter — though  not  mentioned  in  the  list  of 
gates  until  1356,  seems  to  have  existed  in  Saxon 
times,  and  to  have  been  an  enlarged  postern  near  the 
place  where  the  waters  of  the  Walbrook  left  the  city — 
was  rebuilt  in  1472,  and  is  subsequently  described  as 
one  of  the  "  most  magnificent "  gates  of  the  city. 
The  old  Aldgate — through  which  the  first  Queen 
Mary  entered  the  city  on  ascending  the  throne,  and 
where  her  sister  Elizabeth  greeted  her,  accompanied 
by  two  thousand  horse,  and  where  the  two  exchanged 
perfidious  embraces — was  taken  down  in  1606,  and  a 
fine  new  one  erected  in  its  stead.  The  new  gate  was 
on  the  outer  side  adorned  by  a  statue  of  James  I., 


SAXON  LONDON.  61 

standing  on  the  royal  supporters,  while  two  Roman 
soldiers  were  represented,  one  on  either  side  of  the 
gate,  as  being  armed  and  ready  to  defend  its  entrance, 
and  on  the  inner  side  by  statues  of  Fortune,  Peace 
and  Charity.  The  system  of  leasing  the  tenements 
above  the  gates  for  private  dwellings,  even  though  it 
was  stipulated  that  the  lessees  should  keep  them  in 
repair  under  penalty  of  ejectment  from  the  premises, 
and  that  the  mayor  and  city  authorities  reserved  to 
themselves  the  right  to  enter  the  premises  in  the  time 
of  war,  disturbance  and  public  defence,  resulted, 
nevertheless,  in  great  evils,  and  the  nuisance  was 
finally  stopped  by  an  act  of  the  city  in  1386,  decree- 
ing that  "no  grant  shall  from  henceforth  in  any  way 
be  made  unto  any  person  of  the  gates  or  of  the  dwell- 
ing houses  above  the  gates,"  etc.  The  newer  gates, 
erected  in  place  of  the  older  ones,  became  therefore 
merely  monumentally  defensive  structures,  and  finally 
an  Act  of  Parliament,  passed  in  1760,  empowered  the 
city  authorities  to  remove  the  gates  and  effect  other 
improvements;  and  under  its  provisions  these  relics 
of  past  methods  of  fortification  were  torn  down,  and 
their  materials  sold  and  carted  away.  It  is,  perhaps, 
a  sad  commentary  on  past  greatness  that  the  materials 
of  Aldersgate,  esteemed  one  of  the  finest  of  the  city 
gates,  brought  only  £91,  and  that  many  of  the  statues 
which  adorned  them  fared  the  fate  of  Lud  and  his 
two  sons. 

Not  only  did  secular  improvement  gain  a  new  start 


62  LONDON. 

under  the  very  wide  influence  of  Erkenwald,  but,  as 
was  only  natural,  Christian  churches  now  began  to 
rear  themselves  openly  on  the  ruins  or  sites  of  pagan 
temples.  Already,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  year  610 
tradition  has  it  that  JEthelberht  caused  a  new  St. 
Paul's  to  be  erected  on  the  spot  where  a  Christian 
temple  had  existed  in  the  later  Roman  days;  and 
Seberht  in  614,  by  his  high  patronage,  and  doubtless 
also  by  his  financial  assistance,  was  largely  instru- 
mental in  the  erection  of  a  church  edifice  which  came 
to  be  known  by  the  name  of  St.  Peter's,  and  which 
was  situated  outside  the  city,  near  the  place  where  the 
old  ford  of  the  Thames  existed,  and  on  the  spot  where 
Westminster  Abbey  now  stands.  Under  the  episco- 
pal administration  of  Erkenwald,  the  erection  of 
Christian  churches  continued  steadily,  and  by  the 
close  of  the  seventh  century  London  was  already 
adequately  supplied  with  Christian  temples. 

Close  to  St.  Paul's,  as  though  seeking  protection 
from  another  church,  two  others  nestled — that  is,  St. 
Gregory-under-St.-Paul's  and  St.  Faith-under-St.- 
Paul's.  The  first  of  these  two  was  actually  attached 
to  the  south  wall  of  St.  Paul's  itself.  It  was  the 
parish  church  of  the  neighborhood,  but  when  de- 
stroyed in  the  great  fire  was  not  rebuilt,  the  parish 
work  being  removed  to  St.  Mary  Magdalen's,  Knight- 
rider  Street.  It  was  of  St.  Gregory  that  the  learned 
Dr.  John  Hewitt  (executed  for  treason  on  Tower  Hill 
in  1658,  because  he  had  been  sending  money  to  the 


SAXON  LONDON.  63 

king)  was  rector;  and  here  also  that  Jeremy  Taylor 
delivered  some  of  his  most  famous  sermons,  and  that 
Evelyn  heard  him  in  1654.  The  church  of  St.  Faith, 
while  not  actually  murally  joined  to  St.  Paul's,  yet 
was  near  enough  to  the  larger  edifice  to  be  in  very 
close  proximity  of  the  latter's  northeasterly  corner. 
In  fact,  when  the  cathedral  was  enlarged  in  that  di- 
rection, which  was  done  in  1255,  it  was  found  neces- 
sary to  remove  it  to  make  way  for  the  extension.  It 
was  then  that  a  chapel  of  St.  Faith  was  arranged  in 
the  crypt  of  the  larger  church,  though  this  again 
was  changed  under  Henry  VIII.,  when  a  chapel  in 
the  body  of  the  church  proper,  to  which  was  given 
the  name  of  Jesus  Chapel,  was  substituted  for  the 
chapel  in  the  crypt,  Attached  to  the  old  St.  Faith 
of  Saxon  origin  had,  in  fact,  been  a  Jesus  chapel, 
which  had  a  bell-tower  containing  four  great  bells. 
They  existed  until  the  reign  of  the  above-mentioned 
monarch,  when  Sir  Miles  Partridge  won  them  from 
the  king  over  a  game  of  dice,  and  had  them  taken 
down  and  sold  for  old  copper. 

Next  to  St.  Paul's,  the  most  important  church  of 
Saxon  times  was  probably  St.  Peter's-upon-Cornhill, 
at  the  corner  of  what  is  now  Gracechurch  Street,  that 
southerly  extremity  of  Bishopsgate  Within,  but  which 
was  in  Saxon  times  called  the  Ermyn  Way.  Con- 
cerning this  church,  we  have  already  seen  that  the 
legend  of  its  foundation  by  the  apocryphal  Lucius, 
"  King  of  the  Britons,"  rests  upon  no  reliable  or  even 


64  LONDON. 

credible  evidence.  At  the  time  when  the  said  Lucius 
is  supposed  to  have  "reigned"  over  the  Britons, 
London  and  the  greater  portion  of  Britain  was  in 
the  possession  and  under  the  control  of  the  Roman 
power — a  power  then  pagan  and  not  Christianized — 
and  Lucius,  if  he  lived  at  all,  was  at  most  a  tributary 
chief  of  a  small  band  of  Britons,  in  refuge  in  the 
mountain  fastnesses  of  Wales,  or  the  North  Country. 
It  could  have  been  only  long  after — at  least  a  century 
and  a  half  later — that,  owing  to  the  conversion  of 
Constantine,  London,  then  Augusta,  became  a  Chris- 
tian city,  and  that  Christian  churches  were  openly 
erected.  That  St.  Peter's-upon-Cornhill  was  erected 
about  this  time,  and  was  thus  a  place  of  Christian 
worship  in  the  later  Roman  days,  is  possible,  though 
there  is  no  evidence  to  prove  it ;  and  it  is  far  more 
likely  that,  like  St.  JEthelburgha  and  St.  Osyth,  it 
owes  its  foundation  to  the  great  spirit  of  Erkemvald, 
that  zealous  successor  of  St.  Augustin  of  Canterbury. 
Even  though  it  had  existed  in  later  Roman  days, 
it  must  have  been  destroyed  during  the  tumultuous 
confusion  of  the  Saxon  invasion  and  conquest,  or 
fallen  into  ruin  during  the  two  centuries  of  the  new 
paganism  which  swept  over  the  land  on  the  coming  of 
the  northern  barbarians,  and  owed  its  reconstruction 
and  re-establishment  to  the  new  life  which,  under  his 
episcopal  administration,  animated  Christian  London. 
The  old  church  suffered  annihilation  by  the  great  fire, 
and  the  present  edifice  was  erected  under  that  great 


SAXON  LONDON.  65 

master  architect  to  whom  London  owes  so  many  of  its 
monuments,  Sir  Christopher  Wren. 

Another  important  church  of  the  Saxon  period 
seems  to  have  been  the  church  of  St.  Martin-le-Grand. 
This  ancient  collegiate  church  and  sanctuary  stood  on 
the  site  of  the  present  General  Post  Office,  in  the 
open  space  which  was  formed  by  the  bifurcation  of  the 
Watling  Street,  at  which  juncture,  adjoining  the  open 
space  where  the  Folkmote  met,  it  divided  in  the  direc- 
tion of  Newgate  and  Aldersgate.  St.  Martin-le- 
Grand  was,  in  fact,  one  of  the  oldest  collegiate  institu- 
tions of  the  realm,  and  was  connected  by  tradition 
with  Seberht,  Bercta  and  Mellitus.  Another  tradition 
attributed  its  foundation  to  Wihtred,  king  of  Kent  in 
the  eighth  century.  Like  many  others,  it  suffered 
greatly  during  the  great  Danish  wars,  and  was  com- 
pletely rebuilt  in  the  days  of  Edward  the  Confessor. 
The  church  was  greatly  enlarged  and  embellished 
through  the  munificence  of  Ingelric,  Earl  of  Essex, 
and  his  brother  Girard,  in  1056,  and  confirmed  by  a 
charter  of  William  the  Conqueror  in  1068,  which 
charter  exempted  it  from  all  civil  and  even  ecclesias- 
tical jurisdiction,  so  that,  while  within  the  walls  of  the 
city  of  London,  it  became  a  liberty  by  itself.  The 
mayor  and  the  corporation  often  endeavored,  in  later 
years,  but  always  in  vain,  to  interfere  witji  the  privi- 
leges of  the  precinct.  It  became  naturally  the  refuge 
of  every  malefactor  who  sought  protection  from  just- 
ice, and  criminals,  on  their  way  from  the  prison  over 
VOL.  I.— 5 


66  LONDON. 

Newgate  to  their  execution  at  Tower  Hill,  passed  the 
southern  gate  of  St.  Martin's,  and  often  sought,  and 
sometimes  successfully,  to  escape  from  their  gaolers 
into  the  adjoining  sanctuary.  As  late  as  the  reign  of 
Henry  VI.,  a  soldier,  on  his  way  from  Newgate  to  the 
Guildhall,  was  seized  by  five  of  his  comrades,  who 
came  suddenly  out  of  the  Panyer  Alley,  in  Newgate 
Street,  and  forced  him  from  the  officer  of  the  compter 
into  the  adjacent  sanctuary  of  St.  Martin's.  Again, 
later  still,  if  we  may  credit  Sir  Thomas  More,  one  of 
the  murderers  of  the  young  "  Princes  of  the  Tower  " 
here  rotted  away,  starving  and  forgotten,  yet  safe  from 
the  officers  of  the  law  while  he  remained  within  its 
protecting  shelter.  It  was  from  the  tower  of  St. 
Martin's  that  tolled  the  bell  of  the  curfew  hour,  when 
all  the  gates  of  the  city  were  to  be  shut,  "  not  to  be 
opened  afterwards  that  night,  unless  by  special  pre- 
cept" of  the  city  authorities,  whether  bishop,  por- 
treeve, or,  in  later  years,  the  mayor  and  aldermen ;  and 
also  shut  as  well  were  to  be  "  all  the  taverns  for  wine 
or  for  ale,"  and  no  one  was  to  "  go  about  the  streets 
or  ways."  The  ringing  of  the  curfew  at  St.  Martin's 
was  the  signal  for  the  ringing  of  the  bells  of  every 
parish  church,  so  that  they  began  and  ended  together. 
At  the  first  stroke  of  the  curfew  at  St.  Martin's  the 
great  gates  were  closed  and  the  wickets  opened,  and 
at  the  last  stroke  the  wickets  were  themselves  closed. 
Any  person  found  wandering  about  the  streets  after 
curfew  had  rung,  "  with  sword  and  buckler,  or  with 


Post  Office 


SAXON  LONDON.  67 

any  other  arm,  doing  mischief  whereof  evil  suspicion 
may  arise,  or  in  any  other  manner,  unless  it  be  some 
great  lord  or  other  substantial  person  of  good  reputa- 
tion, or  a  person  of  their  household  who  from  them 
shall  have  a  warranty,  and  who  is  going  from  one  to 
another  with  a  light  to  guide  him,"  was  promptly 
taken  into  custody,  and  put  into  the  Tun  Prison  in 
Cornhill,  "  which  for  such  misdoers  is  assigned." 

In  the  repetition  of  the  ordinance  in  the  37th  of 
Edward  III.  (1363)  the  bell  "  at  the  church  of  our 
Lady  at  Bow "  was  substituted  for  that  of  St.  Mar- 
tin's, and  Newgate  Prison  for  that  of  the  Tun  in 
Cornhill.  At  the  dissolution  of  the  religious  houses 
in  1537,  the  college  was  levelled  to  the  ground,  and 
the  church  itself,  destroyed  in  the  great  fire  of  1666, 
was  not  rebuilt.  The  precincts  themselves,  however, 
retained  the  privilege  of  sanctuary  until  the  Act  21, 
James  I.,  c.  28  (1623),  declared  that  all  such  privilege 
of  sanctuary  should  thereafter  be  void.  Notwith- 
standing this,  the  place  still  afforded  shelter  to  debtors 
until  1697,  when,  by  the  Act  8  and  9,  William  III., 
"  all  such  sanctuaries  or  pretended  sanctuaries  "  were 
finally  suppressed.  When  the  excavations  were  being 
made  in  1818  for  the  foundations  of  the  General  Post 
Office,  an  early  crypt,  and  vaults  of  a  still  earlier 
foundation,  were  laid  bare ;  but  the  new  masonry  soon 
again  concealed  the  old  structure,  and  thus  was  the 
last  vestige  of  St.  Marti n-le-Grand  finally  destroyed. 

While  not  perhaps  so  important  in  point  of  interest 


68  LONDON. 

as  either  of  the  two  just  described,  the  church  of  St. 
Andrew  was  nevertheless  of  considerable  importance, 
even  as  early  as  the  Saxon  period.  It  stood  on  the 
site  which  is  now  the  northeasterly  corner  of  Leaden- 
hall  Street  and  St.  Mary  Axe,  and  came  eventually  to 
be  specially  designated  as  St.  Andrew's  Undershaft, 
because,  "of  old  time  every  year  on  May  Day  it 
was  used  that  an  high  or  long  shaft  or  Maypole  was 
set  up  there  before  the  south  door  of  said  church." 
Thus  was  the  church  designated,  to  distinguish  it  from 
others  in  the  city  dedicated  to  the  same  saint.  The 
last  year  that  the  shaft  overlooking  the  old  church 
was  erected  was  on  "Evil  Mayday,"  1517,  when  a 
serious  fray  occurred  between  the  apprentices  and  the 
foreigners  settled  in  the  parish,  which  so  greatly 
marred  the  festivities  of  the  occasion  that  it  was  held 
sufficient  reason  for  suppressing  the  custom.  The  old 
church  having  become  unsuited  for  the  needs  of  later 
days,  a  new  structure  was  erected  on  the  same  site  in 
1520-1532 — one  of  the  latest  of  the  perpendicular 
period  of  Gothic  architecture,  and  one  of  the  first  in 
London  adapted  to  the  form  of  the  new  worship. 

Among  the  other  churches  of  the  Saxon  period,  St. 
.ZEthelburgha  and  St.  Osyth  stand  out  the  most  con- 
spicuously. Both  were  named,  if  we  may  accept  tra- 
dition of  the  times,  after  the  daughters  of  kings — 
princesses  who  had  earnestly  engaged  in  the  conver- 
sion of  the  benighted  Saxons.  ^Ethelburgha  was  the 
daughter  of  no  less  a  person  than  jEthelberht  of 


SAXON  LONDON.  69 

Kent,  whose  wife  Bercta,  of  France,  had  brought 
back  Christianity  to  the  shores  of  Britain.  She  was 
also  a  niece  of  Ricula,  wife  of  Seberht  of  Essex,  the 
first  Christian  king  of  that  country.  Having  wit- 
nessed the  terrible  consequences  brought  about  by  the 
weakness  of  Mellitus,  the  scandalous  behavior  of 
Wina  and  the  perversity  of  her  cousins,  the  sons  of 
Seberht,  she  lived  to  see  the  faith  of  her  heart  once 
more  established,  and  earned  her  saintship  as  well  by 
her  zealous  efforts  in  its  behalf  as  by  the  perfection 
of  her  life.  The  church  which  bears  her  name  es- 
caped the  great  fire,  and  is  undoubtedly  one  of  the 
oldest  now  remaining  in  London.  It  was  built  near 
the  gate  of  Bishop  Erkenwald,  and  is  now  reached  by 
an  alley  from  Bishopsgate  Street  Within. 

The  other — that  is,  the  church  of  St.  Osyth — was 
situated  to  the  south  of  the  market-place  known  as 
West  Cheap,  on  the  west  bank  of  the  Walbrook.  St. 
Osyth,  it  would  appear,  was  the  mother  of  Offa,  a 
royal  youth  of  great  beauty  and  loveliness,  if  we  may 
believe  Bede,  who  deserted  wife,  lands,  kindred  and 
country,  to  go  to  Rome  with  Coinred,  king  of  Mercia, 
where  both  took  monastic  vows.  That  he  actually 
reigned  as  king  is  a  fact  not  mentioned  by  Bede ;  nor 
is  this  to  be  wondered  at,  since  we  find  him  not  un- 
frequently  referred  to  as  king  of  Mercia,  whereas  Es- 
sex was  in  reality  his  kingdom.  Dying  childless,  he 
was  succeeded-  by  his  cousin  Selred,  who  was  killed  in 
746.  The  church  of  St.  Osyth,  having  fallen  into 


70  LONDON. 

disrepair,  was  restored  by  Benedict  Shorne,  a  wealthy 
fishmonger  of  the  reign  of  Edward  II.,  and  became 
known  by  his  name,  the  street  only  retaining  its  orig- 
inal appellation.  By  one  of  the  singular  corruptions 
so  common  in  England,  St.  Benedict  Shorne  became 
St.  Bennet  Sherehog,  by  which  name  the  church  was 
known  until  it  was  destroyed  by  the  great  fire,  never 
to  be  rebuilt. 

To  the  same  period  belongs  also  another  great 
name,  that  of  St.  Botolph,  who  is  commemorated  in 
four  churches.  St.  Botolph  was  the  particular  patron 
saint  of  East  Anglia,  and  to  his  special  protection  all 
wayfarers  going  north  over  the  bridge  commended 
themselves.  The  most  ancient  of  the  churches  erected 
in  his  honor  stood  at  the  foot  of  the  hill  leading  to 
the  bridge,  while  another  was  immediately  without 
Bishopsgate,  on  the  very  first  step,  as  it  were,  of  the 
Ermyn  Way.  Later,  when  Aldersgate  was,  as  we 
have  seen,  opened  to  relieve  the  traffic  through  what 
until  then  had  been  the  only  northern  outlet  of  the 
city,  another  St.  Botolph  was  erected,  in  order  that  the 
traveller  selecting  the  new  road  should  not  be  deprived 
of  the  blessings  attendant  on  a  visit  to  the  shrine  of 
the  wayfarers'  patron  saint ;  and  again,  when  Aldgate 
was  opened  in  the  eleventh  century,  a  fourth  St.  Bo- 
tolph's  Church  was  erected,  for  the  same  reason,  near 
this  new  outlet  of  the  city.  Of  these  four  churches, 
the  first  and  oldest,  which  stood  on  the  west  at  the 
foot  of  the  hill  in  approaching  London  Bridge,  and 


SAXON  LONDON.  71 

was  known  as  St.  Botolph's  Billingsgate,  and  which 
possessed  perhaps  the  greatest  historic  interest,  was 
destroyed  in  the  great  fire  and  never  rebuilt ;  the 
second,  "  without  Bishopsgate,"  also  destroyed  in  the 
great  fire,  was  rebuilt  hi  the  first  half  of  the  last  cen- 
tury, the  first  stone  being  laid  in  1725  and  the  work 
completed  in  1728  under  the  direction  of  Giles 
Dance,  the  father  of  George  Dance,  the  architect ;  the 
third,  "without  Aldersgate,"  while  not  wholly  de- 
stroyed in  the  great  fire,  suffered  considerably,  and 
had  to  be  taken  down  eventually,  the  present  edifice 
having  been  erected  in  1754-'57 ;  while  the  fourth 
mentioned — that  is,  St.  Botolph  "  without  Aldgate  " — 
while  it  escaped  the  great  fire,  became  so  dilapidated 
that  it  had  to  be  taken  down,  the  present  structure 
having  been  erected  in  1741-'44  under  the  younger 
Dance. 

Of  these  other  churches  of  which  the  establishment 
date  of  Saxon  times,  the  most  noteworthy  are  St. 
Michael's  upon  Coruhill,  situated,  as  its  name  indi- 
cated, upon  Cornhill,  and  which  stood  in  an  open 
space  a  little  to  the  west  of  St.  Peter's  Church,  already 
mentioned;  St.  Dunstan,  which  came  to  be  called 
St.  Dunstan  in  the  East  (to  distinguish  it  from  a  later 
St.  Dunstan  subsequently  erected  in  the  West,  in 
Fleet  Street),  and  which  stood  on  the  slope  of  St. 
Dunstan's  Hill,  between  Tower  Street  and  Lower 
Thames  Street,  now  the  corner  of  St.  Dunstan's  Hill 
and  St.  Idol's  Lane ;  St.  Magnus  the  Martyr,  which 


72  LONDON. 

stood  on  the  east  at  the  foot  of  the  hill  in  approach- 
ing London  Bridge,  opposite  the  old  Saxon  church 
of  St.  Botolph ;  St.  Stephen,  which  stood  on  the  left 
bank  of  the  Wai  brook,  a  little  to  the  southeast  of  the 
poultry  market,  in  what  is  now  Walbrook  Street, 
back  of  the  Mansion  House;  St.  Swithin,  which  was 
situated  on  the  northern  side  of  the  way,  at  the  con- 
junction of  the  Watling  Street  and  of  the  old  road 
which  was  parallel  to  the  river,  and  which  followed 
the  line  now  identified  with  the  lower  portion  of 
Queen  Victoria  Street  and  the  present  Canon 
Street;  St.  Mary  (Aldermary),  which  stood  a  little  to 
the  south  of  the  Watling  Street,  between  St.  Faith's 
and  St.  Swithin,  now  within  the  triangle  formed  by 
what  remains  of  the  Watling  Street,  Bow  Lane  and 
Queen  Victoria  Street;  St.  Mary  Magdalen,  on  the 
north  side  of  the  already  mentioned  river  road,  now 
the  corner  of  Knightrider  Street  and  the  Old  Change ; 
and  St.  Mary  Somerset,  on  the  south  side  of  the  said 
road,  now  on  the  north  side  of  Upper  Thames  Street. 
All  these  suffered  annihilation  during  the  great  fire, 
but  were  reconstructed  on  the  same  sites  under  the 
direction  and  from  the  plans  of  Sir  Christopher  Wren. 
There  were  also  the  churches  of  St.  Peter  at  the 
Cross,  which  stood  on  the  site  which  is  now  the 
northwest  corner  of  Cheapside  and  Wood  Street,  St. 
Mary  Bothaw,  which  was  situated  on  the  south  side 
of  the  way,  at  the  conjunction  of  the  Watling  Street 
and  the  river  road,  diagonally  opposite  St.  Swithm's, 


SAXON  LONDON.  73 

another  and  third  St.  Peter's,  and  Holy  Trinity  the 
Less,  both  of  which  were  situated  in  the  meadows  be- 
tween the  river  road  and  the  river,  and  near  to  St. 
Mary  Somerset.  All  of  these  suffered  destruction 
also  in  the  great  fire  and  were  not  rebuilt. 

The  kings  of  Mercia  having  once  possessed  them- 
selves of  London,  did  not  easily  relinquish  their 
precious  acquisition,  and  in  a  charter  of  JEthelbald  of 
Mercia,  whose  reign  extended  from  718  to  757,  and 
which  said  charter  bears  the  date  A.D.  734,  there  is 
special  mention  made  of  London  in  connection  with 
privileges  concerning  port  and  shipping,  this  being, 
indeed,  the  first  mention  of  London  in  any  contempo- 
rary document  now  extant.  Said  charter  is  preserved 
in  the  British  Museum,  and  states  that  the  king, 
while  the  collecting  of  all  the  port  taxes  is  one  of  his 
royal  prerogatives,  grants  to  the  Bishop  of  Rochester 
the  right  of  free  entry  to  the  port  for  one  ship,  either 
his  property  or  that  of  another.  Offa  of  Mercia,  one 
of  ^Ethelbald's  immediate  successors,  makes  no  men- 
tion of  London  in  any  of  his  charters,  but  Coenulf, 
his  successor,  speaks  of  a  Witan,  or  National  Council, 
held  in  London  in  811,  and,  in  alluding  to  London, 
he  calls  it  "  the  illustrious  place  and  royal  city." 

The  importance  of  London,  considered  strategically 
or  commercially,  being  now  duly  appreciated  and 
recognized  by  the  rival  sovereigns  of  the  so-called 
Heptarchy,  its  possession  seems  to  have  been  one  of 
the  principal  aims  and  ambitions  of  their  respective 


74  LONDON. 

existences.  When  the  supremacy  of  Mercia  declined 
and  that  of  Wessex  arose,  London  became  the  prop- 
erty of  the  conqueror.  Egberht  received  in  823  the 
submission  of  Essex.  In  827  we  learn  that  he  was 
present  in  London,  and  in  833  he  held  a  Witan  there, 
at  which  he  presided  in  state.  This  Witan  was  held 
to  consider  a  matter  of  the  highest  importance.  The 
hour  of  retribution  had  arrived.  What  the  Saxons' 
forefathers  had  inflicted  on  the  Britons  was  in  turn 
to  be  inflicted  by  the  Danes  on  them ;  but  the  Saxons 
were  made  of  sterner  stuff  than  the  Britons,  and  real- 
izing the  verity  of  the  maxim  which  ascribes  to  unity 
of  thought  and  purpose  the  greater  strength,  they 
buried  their  petty  jealousies,  and,  making  England 
into  a  single  kingdom  as  it  were,  thereby  temporarily, 
at  least,  overcame  their  enemies.  London  was  of 
course  the  principal  point  of  attack.  Its  walls  un- 
fortunately wholly  failed  in  their  protection,  and  the 
Danes,  after  a  successful  siege,  broke  into  the  city. 
When  repulsed,  they  broke  in  again,  and  so  much  did 
they  come  to  consider  it  their  property  and  headquar- 
ters, that  when  in  872  Alfred  the  Great  was  com- 
pelled to  make  a  truce  with  them,  they  actually  re- 
tired to  London,  as  if  it  were  legitimately  their  own 
city. 

With  his  military  experience  and  political  sagacity 
Alfred  saw  clearly  that  London  was  an  absolute 
necessity.  For  the  king  of  England  to  be  deprived 
of  his  rightful  capital,  and  thus  reduced  to  be  a 


SAXON  LONDON.  75 

wanderer  in  his  dominions,  was  for  him  to  be  indeed 
in  a  pitiable  plight.  It  was  long,  however,  before  he 
accomplished  his  end.  His  plans  were  matured  in 
884.  The  story  of  the  conflict  is  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  the  story  of  his  life.  To  capture  London 
was  his  easiest  task;  to  keep  it  a  task  of  far  greater 
difficulty.  Finding  what  remained  of  the  Koman 
defences  practically  useless,  and  the  repairs  made  by 
the  Saxons  and  the  Danes  equally  ineffectual,  and 
appreciating  the  value  of  fortifications  against  bar- 
barians, his  first  object,  after  establishing  his  power, 
was  the  restoration  of  the  ancient  walls.  To  him 
may  be  attributed  the  building  of  at  least  two,  if  not 
three,  of  the  newer  gates  which  we  have  already  had 
occasion  to  mention — that  is,  Aldersgate,  Cripplegate 
and  Moorgate. 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  extent  of  Alfred's 
work  of  reparation,  we  have  but  few  details  on  the 
subject.  Suffice  it,  however,  that  it  proved  all  that 
was  necessary;  for  London,  now  fortified,  held  out 
against  the  Danes,  when  all  of  Middlesex,  Essex, 
Kent,  Sussex  and  even  Hampshire  were  in  possession 
of  the  enemy.  Meanwhile  London  had  also  increased 
greatly  in  wealth.  From  the  holding  of  a  Witan 
there  in  833  by  Egberht,  London  had  become  the 
royal  city,  and  a  palace,  of  which  the  first  buildings 
were  erected  during  Egberht's  reign  and  by  his  orders, 
and  which  was  greatly  enlarged  and  beautified  by 
JEthelstan,  became  the  usual  habitation  of  the  English 


76  LONDON. 

kings.  Indeed,  so  great  were  the  alterations*  and 
additions  made  to  Egberht's  palace  by  JEthelstan 
that  the  palace  has  come  to  be  generally  referred  to 
as  the  palace  of  JEthelstan.  The  greater  security 
which  London  afforded  naturally  attracted  merchants 
and  other  men  of  business,  and  London's  greater 
commercial  importance  is  proved  by  the  fact  that 
when  this  last  mentioned  king  in  931  established  his 
mints,  he  assigned  eight  coiners  to  London  and  only 
seven  to  Canterbury,  which  had  previously  out- 
rivalled  London  in  commercial  activity.  Already  in 
-ZEthelstan's  reign  we  find  a  "Frithguild"  in  exist- 
ence. Though  in  reality  nothing  more  than  a  friendly 
association,  organized  for  purposes  of  social  reunion, 
yet  its  importance  will  be  appreciated  when  later  we 
see  how  great  was  the  influence  of  the  guilds  upon 
the  development  of  the  city. 

Under  Egberht,  surnamed  the  Peaceable,  not  only 
commerce,  but  also  the  ecclesiastical  establishments, 
gained  greatly,  and  the  church  of  St.  Peter  at  West- 
minster, which  had,  as  we  have  seen,  owed  its  founda- 
tion to  Seberht,  was,  with  its  adjacent  monastery, 
notably  enlarged.  His  reign  is,  however,  on  the  other 
hand,  associated  with  one  of  those  great  calamities 
which  at  irregular  intervals  visited  Ixmdon  as  a  ter- 
rible scourge,  and  so  materially  affected  its  develop- 
ment and  prosperity;  for  in  the  year  961  occurred 
one  of  the  great  London  fires,  in  which  the  cathedral 
church  of  St.  Paul,  which  owed  its  erection  to  that 


SAXON  LONDON.  77 

great  saint,  -ZEthelberht,  king  of  Kent,  suffered  de- 
struction. 

^thelred  found  within  the  walls  of  London  the 
protection  which  his  misfortunes  and  political  necessi- 
ties demanded.  Here  he  felt,  at  least,  in  partial 
security  from  the  Danes,  and  it  was  during  this  reign, 
and  from  London,  that  started  the  famous  expedition 
of  992,  whereby  the  river  was  again  opened  to  com- 
merce, and  on  the  return  of  which  expedition  an 
attack  from  the  Danes  was  so  successfully  repulsed. 
This  security  was  not,  however,  to  be  long  lived. 
Sweyn  burned  with  a  desire  to  possess  himself  of  the 
city.  He  felt  that  without  London  he  could  never 
make  good  his  title  to  being  king  of  England.  The 
capital  city  was  the  keystone  of  the  throne.  Twice 
he  essayed  to  subdue  the  city  by  a  siege ;  and  while, 
on  the  first  occasion,  ^Ethelred,  feeling  the  weakness 
of  his  arms  and  the  powerlessness  of  his  position,  en- 
deavored to  buy  him  off,  and  succeeded  in  so  doing, 
the  second  time,  Sweyn,  having  taken  Canterbury, 
was  emboldened  thereby  and  refused  to  withdraw. 
.ZEthelred,  fearing  that  the  end  had  come  to  all  resist- 
ance, fled,  and  the  citizens,  feeling  themselves  without 
a  leader,  threw  open  the  gates  and  admitted  the 
Danes.  But  Sweyn  did  not  long  survive  his  triumph ; 
for,  the  climate  of  London  evidently  not  agreeing 
with  him,  he  died,  after  only  one  winter  spent  in  his 
capital,  at  Gainsborough,  in  1013.  This  was,  of 
course,  the  signal  for  the  return  of  -ZEthelred,  who, 


78  LONDON. 

re-entering  his  capital,  ended  his  days  within  its  pro- 
tecting walls  two  years  later,  in  April,  1016.  He 
was  buried,  we  are  told,  in  the  then  existing  church 
of  St.  Paul.  If  so,  his  grave  must  have  been  among 
the  ruins  of  the  old  St.  Paul,  the  church  of  Cedd  and 
Sebbi,  if  not  of  Mellitus  and  Seberht ;  for  it  had,  as 
we  have  seen,  been  destroyed  by  fire  some  years  be- 
fore— that  is,  in  951 — and  it  is  scarcely  probable  or 
possible  that  the  new  church  was  as  yet  completed. 

On  the  death  of  JEthelred,  the  Witan  which  called 
his  son  Edmund,  surnamed  "Ironside,"  to  the  throne, 
was  held  in  London.  His  coronation  followed,  and 
with  his  installation  the  contest  between  the  Saxon 
and  Danish  royal  families  commenced  again.  Canute, 
Sweyn's  son,  disputed  Edmund's  title  to  the  crown. 
In  the  troubles  that  followed,  Edmund's  bravery  is 
beyond  dispute;  but  his  caution  may,  indeed,  be  ques- 
tioned, for  by  leaving  the  protection  of  London's 
walls — in  the  protection  of  which  such  reliance  had 
been  placed  by  Alfred  the  Great  and  the  late  king 
jJEthelred,  his  own  father — he  jeopardized  and  finally 
lost  his  cause.  Canute  triumphed,  and  Edmund  was 
foully  murdered  at  Oxford,  on  November  30,  1016,  in 
the  autumn  of  the  year  in  which  he  had  succeeded  to 
the  throne. 

The  events  of  the  Danish  occupation,  and  those 
that  followed  it  to  the  time  of  the  Norman  conquest, 
belong  properly  to  the  history  of  England,  and,  while 
they  had  undoubtedly  some  bearing  on  the  growth 


SAXON  LONDON.  79 

and  development  of  London,  they  can  scarcely  be 
considered  as  sufficiently  considerable  or  important  to 
deserve  any  lengthy  recapitulation  in  the  treatment  of 
this  present  theme.  There  are,  however,  numerous 
traces  of  the  Danish  occupation  in  London,  some  of 
which  call  for  our  attention.  As  Thor  and  Odin  had 
been  brought  over  by  the  Saxon  invaders,  so  does  the 
name  of  Olave  follow  in  the  wake  of  the  Danish 
conquest.  We  find  this  name  disguised  in  modern 
times  under  the  name  of  Tooley  Street,  situated  at 
the  southern  extremity  of  London  Bridge ;  and  sev- 
eral churches  were  also  dedicated  to  the  saint,  one  of 
which  still  stands  at  the  southwestern  corner  of  Hart 
Street  and  Seething  Lane,  at  the  top  of  Crutched 
Friars.  The  old  church  was  at  some  period  replaced 
by  the  present  structure,  though  at  what  exact  time 
does  not  seem  to  appear.  The  present  edifice  survived 
the  great  fire,  and  has  become  better  known,  less  for 
its  connection  with  the  Danish  period  than  for  its 
connection  with  Samuel  Pepys,  who  worshipped  there, 
and  by  whom  it  is  mentioned  frequently  in  his  diary. 
It  has  been  frequently  restored.  There  were  two 
other  St.  Olaves — one  called  St.  Olave  (Jewry),  the 
other  St.  Olave  (Silver  Street). 

^  Another  church,  the  foundation  of  which  is  of  the 
post  Danish-Saxon  period,  is  that  of  St.  Edmund  the 
King,  which  stood  on  one  of  the  lanes  leading  from 
the  poultry  market  to  the  Ermyn  Way,  which  lane 
now  bears  the  name  of  Lombard  Street.  The  church 


80  LONDON. 

was  dedicated  to  a  certain  Edmund,  known  to  mar- 
tyrology  as  "King  of  the  East  Angles"  —  and 
who  is  said  to  have  been  killed  by  the  Danes  in  the 
year  870.  As  to  the  origin  of  St.  Clement  Danes,  it 
is  perhaps  more  difficult  to  decide  the  exact  time  of 
its  foundation.  It  may  or  may  not  be  of  the  era  of 
Canute.  The  objection  advanced  to  its  having  been 
founded  at  that  time  is  that  hi  those  days  its  situation 
was  quite  unprotected,  being  beyond  the  walls,  and 
it  has  been  held  to  be  unlikely  that  a  Danish  settle- 
ment would  have  been  so  placed,  between  London 
and  Westminster ;  while  it  is  held  by  others  that  this 
objection  is  not  acceptable,  since  access  to  the  settle- 
ment could  and  must  have  been  from  the  north,  the 
road  between  London  and  Westminster  running 
through  Holborn.  As  regards  St  Bride's,  it  is  es- 
teemed certain  that  it  cannot  be  of  the  time  of 
Canute,  since  the  ground  on  which  it  stands  was  then 
under  water.-  Both  St.  Clement  Danes  and  St.  Bride's, 
and  also  St.  Dunstan's  in  the  West,  were  at  first,  how- 
ever, only  chapels  of  ease  or  district  churches  of 
Westminster. 

It  would  seem  to  have  been  under  the  reign  of 
Canute  that  London  obtained  its  first  corporative  ex- 
istence ;  for  at  his  death,  the  chronicle  tells  us  that  the 
magnates  of  the  realm  assembled  in  solemn  parlia- 
ment, and  among  the  representatives  enumerated  are 
the  "lithsmen"  of  London.  These  were  the  traders 
or  merchants  of  the  city,  who  were  not  only  the  own- 


SAXON  LONDON.  81 

ers,  but  who  during  Canute's  long  reign  became  the 
actual  administrators  of  the  city's  wealth.  The  \Vitan 
which  followed  the  death  of  Canute  chose  his  eldest 
born,  Harold,  as  his  successor;  and  three  years  later, 
on  his  death,  another  Witan  summoned  Emma,  widow 
of  both  ^Ethelred  and  Canute,  and  her  son,  Harde- 
canute,  from  Bruges,  and  accorded  the  crown  to  the 
latter.  This  estimable  prince  distinguished  himself 
principally  by  causing  the  body  of  his  half-brother 
and  predecessor  to  be  dug  up  and  cast  into  the 
Thames.  It  is  related  that  it  wras  found,  however, 
by  some  fishermen,  and  given  decent  burial  in  St. 
Clement  Danes,  which  is  held  to  account  for  the 
name  of  that  church.  At  the  death  of  Hardecanute, 
Edward,  surnamed  the  Confessor,  and  who  was  the 
son  of  .^Ethelred  and  Emma,  and  therefore  the  half- 
brother  of  Hardecanute,  was  called  to  the  throne. 
His  history  is  connected  more  with  Westminster  than 
with  London,  and  it  is  to  him  that  Westminster, 
previously  known  as  St.  Peter's  in  the  West,  owes  its 
transformation  from  merely  a  monastic  church  into  a 
full-fledged  abbey  and  royal  residence. 

In  order  that  we  may  have  a  correct  appreciation 
of  what  Westminster  was  in  the  days  of  him  of  whom 
we  write,  it  will  be  necessary  to  return  to  its  very  be- 
ginnings, when  it  was  nought  but  a  sort  of  mud  flat, 
surrounded  on  every  side  by  perfectly  open  country. 
As  late  as  the  sixth  century,  the  greater  part  of  what 
is  now  Westminster  was  a  sort  of  tidal  estuary,  which 
VOL.  I.— 6 


82  LONDON. 

twice  a  day  was  covered  by  the  brackish  waters  of  the 
Thames.  Here,  in  the  midst  of  a  marsh,  arose  a 
species  of  hillock,  the  "  Tothill,"  of  which  memory  is 
preserved  to  us  in  Tothill  Street ;  and  upon  the  slight 
eminence,  as  we  have  seen  in  a  previous  chapter,  the 
ancient  Roman  road,  which  diverged  at  the  foot  of 
the  Edgware  Road,  ran  to  the  water's  edge,  where  the 
Thames  was  forded. 

Here,  probably  as  far  back  as  the  Roman  days, 
stood  a  building,  a  sort  of  post-house,  at  which  the 
weary  wayfarer  could  be  temporarily  accommodated. 
It  was  to  take  the  place  of  the  inn,  if  such  it  may  be 
called,  that  the  first  house  of  monks  of  the  Order  of 
St.  -Benedict  was  founded.  In  connection  with  this 
religious  house,  it  is  related,  as  we  have  seen,  that  a 
church  was  built,  by  the  generosity  of  Seberht,  king 
of  Essex,  in  610,  which  church  he  dedicated  to  St. 
Peter.  While  this  date  is  assigned  by  some,  however, 
as  that  of  the  foundation  of  the  monastery,  other  au- 
thorities hold  it  more  probable  that  the  real  foundation 
occurred  in  730-740.  Offa,  king  of  Mercia,  in  refer- 
ring to  the  church  and  monastery  in  a  grant  of  Lon- 
don, bearing  the  date  of  785,  speaks  of  it,  in  the  first 
instance,  merely  as  St.  Peter's.  A  second  time  he  re- 
fers to  it,  however,  as  "  Thorney,"  focus  terribilis 
(terrible  place),  which  appellation  it  has  been  claimed 
had  reference  to  the  thorns  which  abounded  in  that 
locality,  though  it  is  more  likely  that  it  came  by  that 
name  because  the  traveller  who  waited  to  cross  the 


Westminster  Abbey 


SAXON  LONDON.  83 

Thames  here  had  to  wade  as  best  he  could  to  the  first 
stepping-stone,  so  to  speak,  in  the  shallow  stream  being 
the  Thorney.  Oifa  refers  to  the  place  a  third  time  as 
Westminster,  which  name  it  acquired  evidently  be- 
cause of  the  position  it  occupied  in  reference  to  the  city. 
By  the  time  of  Edward  the  Confessor  the  place 
had,  however,  assumed  quite  a  different  appearance. 
The  abbey,  which  had  stood  quite  close  to  the  water's 
edge,  had  come  to  be  gradually  separated  therefrom  by 
a  belt  of  land,  foreshore  at  first,  but  later  entirely  re- 
claimed, and  which  is  at  present  the  site  of  the  Houses 
of  Parliament.  The  plans  of  the  king  for  the  en- 
largement and  beautifying  of  the  church  and  its  adja- 
cent buildings  were  extensive,  and  the  new  abbey 
church  was  only  completed  in  time  to  permit  of  its 
consecration  on  Innocents'  Day,  December  28,  1065 — 
that  is,  just  a  week  before  the  king  died.  The  church 
was  built  in  the  Norman  style,  as  though  anticipatory 
of  the  future  conquerors  of  the  country,  and  was  held  to 
be  a  structure  of  great  grandeur  and  beauty,  and  its 
size,  occupying  as  it  did  almost  the  whole  area  of 
the  present  building,  was  for  those  days  in  itself  a 
thing  unusual.  Built  of  stone,  the  exterior  was  richly 
sculptured,  and  the  windows  were  filled  with  stained 
glass.  The  roof  was  covered  with  lead,  and  in  the 
centre  a  tower  arose,  which  was  crowned,  as  it  were, 
by  a  cupola  of  wood.  While  the  east  end  was  rounded 
by  an  apse,  the  western  end  was  adorned  by  two 
smaller  towers,  which  contained  a  chime  of  five  bells. 


84  LONDON. 

Of  this  edifice  nothing,  however,  remains  but  some 
fragments  of  substructure,  as  the  church  was  almost 
entirely  rebuilt  by  Henry  III.,  and  continually  altered 
in  subsequent  reigns.  The  cloisters,  chapterhouse,  re- 
fectory, dormitory  and  infirmary,  which  had  been 
commenced  under  Edward  the  Confessor,  if  not  com- 
pleted under  him,  were  all  brought  to  completion  in 
the  next  generation  according  to  the  original  plan. 

During  his  reign  the  beginnings  of  later  municipal 
institutions  had  their  inception.  Edward  directs  one 
of  his  writs  to  William,  the  bishop,  and  Swetman,  the 
portreeve,  and  another  to  Leofstan  and  ^Elsi,  por- 
treeves ;  and  again,  a  little  later,  we  find  Esgar,  the 
staller,  and  Ulph  the  chief  officers  of  the  city.  The 
chief  mart  of  the  city  was  the  open,  oblong  space  to 
the  east  of  the  large  central  square  where  the  Folk- 
mote  met,  and  which  was  just  before  St.  Paul's. 
This  long,  open  space  contained  the  booths  of  the 
vendors  of  all  the  commodities  which  were  required 
for  existence  by  the  customs  and  civilization  of  the 
time.  From  this  it  derived  its  name,  "  Cyp-pan,"  the 
Anglo-Saxon  "to  buy — to  bargain,"  which  was  en- 
tirely expressive  of  the  nature  of  the  place.  This 
was  the  present  Cheapside.  It  came  eventually  to  be 
distinguished  as  West  Cheap,  because  of  the  more  east- 
erly mart  nearer  the  Tower,  which  was  denominated 
East  Cheap.  The  neighboring  farmers  brought  the 
produce  of  the  fields  into  the  city  in  huge  carts,  from 
which  the  contents  were  sold  to  the  various  vendors, 


SAXON  LONDON.  85 

who  dispensed  them  again  for  a  consideration  from 
behind  their  stalls.  Sometimes,  though,  the  carts 
themselves  were  drawn  up  in  proper  order,  and  the 
contents  were  disposed  of  by  the  occupants,  who  not 
infrequently  consisted  of  the  farmer's  whole  family, 
who,  having  accompanied  him  to  the  city,  thus  spent 
the  day.  The  booths  of  the  vendors  of  different 
wares  were  assigned  specific  places;  thus  the  Wax 
Chandlers  stood  on  the  south  side  of  the  Watling 
Street,  the  nearest  to  Newgate  and  before  the  Folk- 
mote  place  was  reached  in  entering  the  city  from  that 
point,  while  the  Tallow  Chandlers  were  situated  to  the 
southeast  of  St.  Paul's,  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  place. 
In  Cheapside  proper,  on  the  north  side,  the  booths 
were  arranged  in  the  following  order :  The  Goldsmiths 
came  first.  The  place  assigned  to  them  was  at  the 
corner  of  St.  Martin-le-Graud  and  the  Cheap.  Next 
to  them  came  the  Turners  of  Wood,  who  sold  the 
wooden  bowls,  cups  and  spoons  which  formed  the  sole 
utensils  of  the  table  or  the  kitchen  in  those  primitive 
days.  Their  place  of  business  extended  as  far  as  the 
present  Wood  Street,  on  the  other  side  of  which  were 
the  Wood  Merchants,  properly  speaking — that  is, 
those  who  sold  wood  for  fuel.  They  spread  them- 
selves out  as  far  as  the  present  Milk  Street,  on  the 
other  side  of  which  came  the  Milk  Dealers  and  the 
Sellers  of  Honey.  Next  to  them,  and  on  the  other 
side  of  what  is  now  Ironmongers  Lane,  came  the 
Ironmongers  themselves,  who  had  as  their  immediate 


86  LONDON. 

neighbors  the  Fruiterers,  who  extended  their  trade  as 
far  as  the  Old  Jewry,  beyond  which  came  the  dealers 
whose  occupation  is  so  apt  to  be  brought  to  mind  by 
the  last-mentioned  name — that  is,  the  Clothiers, 
whether  of  new  or  of  second-hand  garments.  Be- 
yond these  again  came  the  Poultry  Market,  from 
which  the  present  Poultry  takes  its  name.  On  the 
south  side  of  the  Cheap,  going  from  west  to  east,  came 
first  the  Bakers,  from  whom  Bread  Street  takes  its 
name,  and  beyond  them  the  Mercers,  and  finally  Gro- 
cers, the  Pepperers  and  the  Spicers.  Later  on,  when 
the  vendors  of  the  various  commodities  had  organized 
themselves  into  guilds  and  companies,  and  obtained 
royal  charters  in  their  corporate  name,  each  erected  a 
hall  of  meeting,  and  to-day  some  of  the  halls  of  the 
present  city  companies  are  on  the  site  originally  as- 
signed to  their  wares  in  Saxon  times,  though  in  the 
cases  of  the  Mercers  and  the  Grocers,  they  have 
crossed  the  Cheap  to  the  north  side.  Here  in  the 
Cheap  the  busiest  side  of  the  city's  life  was  to  be  seen. 
Here  the  housewives  came  to  purchase  their  daily 
stock  of  provisions  for  the  family  supper;  here  the 
men  met  to  discuss  the  topics  of  the  hour  and  the 
latest  news  from  afar;  here  the  Anglo-Saxon,  the 
Dane,  the  remaining  Briton  and  the  Roman  merchant 
passed  each  other,  stopped  to  talk  for  a  few  moments 
and  transacted  their  businesses ;  and  here,  all  or  at 
least  the  greater  part  of  what  we  now  term  the  life  of 
the  street  was  to  be  found. 


NOKMAN  LONDON.  87 


CHAPTER    IV. 

NORMAN   LONDON. 

The  Conquest — William  of  Normandy  enters  London— His  Charter 
— The  Building  of  the  Tower — Its  History  and  Associations — 
The  Chapel  of  St.  John— The  Doomsday  Book— Establishment 
of  the  First  Jewry — Foundation  of  the  Abbey  of  Bermondsey 
— William  II. — Erection  of  the  Palace  of  Westminster— Law 
Courts  at  Westminster  Hall— St.  Stephen's  Chapel— Henry  I. — 
His  Charter  concerning  Middlesex — Foundation  of  the  Priory 
of  Holy  Trinity  at  Aldgate — Foundation  of  the  Priory  of  St. 
Mary  Overies — Foundation  of  the  Priory  of  St.  Bartholomew 
the  Great — Convent  of  St.  Mary  at  Clerkenwell — Convent  of  St. 
John  the  Baptist  at  Hallrwell — Foundation  of  the  Hospital  of 
St.  Giles  in  the  Field— The  Rise  of  the  Orders  of  Chivalry— 
The  Knights  of  St.  John  at  Clerkenwell— The  Knights  Templar 
at  Holborn — Stephen  of  Blois — Destruction  of  London  Bridge — 
The  Church  of  St.  Mary  (Aldermanbury) — Great  St.  Helen's — 
The  Hospital  of  St.  Alphage— The  Hospital  of  St.  Katherine  by 
the  Tower— Foundation  of  Modern  Society — Birth  of  Romantic 
Literature. 

IF  the  Saxons,  when  they  entered  upon  their  con- 
quests, came  into  a  country  demoralized  by  other  in- 
cursions than  their  own,  such  was  not  the  good  for- 
tune of  William  the  Conqueror  and  his  Norman  fol- 
lowers. It  is  true  that  Edward,  the  last  of  the  Saxon 
kings,  had  just  died,  and  that  the  rightful  heir  and 


88  LONDON. 

claimant  of  the  throne,  Edgar  JEtheling,  grandson  of 
Edmund  Ironside,  had  been  passed  over,  and  Harold, 
son  of  Earl  Godwin,  elected  by  the  Witan  to  fill  his 
place.  Yet  both  Harold  and  his  father  had  so  long 
occupied  positions  of  influence  and  importance  at  the 
late  king's  court,  that  the  transition  of  Harold  from 
the  steps  of  the  throne  to  actual  occupancy  of  the 
chair  of  state  was  scarcely  perceptible,  and  Edgar 
JEtheling  had  been  so  generally  admitted  to  be  unfit 
for  the  royal  duties,  that,  in  those  days  the  principle 
of  legitimacy  having  not  yet  taken  firm  root  in  the 
nation,  and  the  elective  principle  being  viewed  as 
quite  natural,  all  seemed  to  augur  a  long  and  peaceful 
rule  for  the  new  dynasty,  had  it  not  been  for  the 
ambition  of  the  Duke  of  Normandy,  and  his  power 
to  put  his  plans  into  execution. 

To  detail  the  circumstances  which  led  to  his  in- 
vasion, to  describe  that  great  event — the  battle  of 
Senlac — and  to  narrate  the  occurrences  which  fol- 
lowed, would  be  to  usurp  the  duties  of  the  dynas- 
tic historian,  duties  not  legitimately  ours,  if  the 
scope  of  this  work  be  considered.  We  must  therefore 
pass  over  these  thrilling  and  imposing  pictures  to 
that  time  when  William  was,  by  a  series  of  circum- 
stances, brought  into  immediate  contact  with  London 
itself. 

William  returned  to  Hastings  from  Senlac.  He 
had  fondly  thought  that  with  that  battle  the  cam- 
paign was  over,  but  such  he  soon  found  was  not  the 


NORMAN  LONDON.  89 

case.  The  death  of  Harold  had  been  followed  by 
unexpected  complications.  On  the  news  of  his  death 
reaching  London,  a  Witan  had  immediately  been 
held,  and  Edgar  ^Etheling  had,  notwithstanding  his 
supposed  disability,  been  unanimously  elected  to  the 
kingly  office,  and  London  put  in  a  state  of  defence 
by  the  citizens.  Unfortunately  for  his  adherents, 
Edgar  was  young,  and  not  particularly  brilliant  in 
his  attainments  or  keen  in  his  military  judgment. 
The  first  place  in  his  council  devolved,  therefore,  on 
Stigand,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  the  military 
operations  were  committed  to  the  two  most  powerful 
Earls,  Edwin  and  Morcar.  William,  in  the  mean- 
while, having  marched  against  London,  their  first  ef- 
forts were  unsuccessful ;  a  large  body  of  troops  sent  out 
of  the  city  in  its  defence  was  completely  routed  by 
a  small  force  of  five  hundred  Norman  horse.  The 
Duke  of  Normandy,  however,  contented  himself 
with  burning  the  suburbs.  He  was  either  afraid  to 
storm  the  walls,  or  determined  upon  a  different  policy. 
Leaving  London,  he  divided  his  army,  spreading  it 
over  the  counties  of  Surrey,  Sussex,  Hampshire  and 
Berkshire,  and  burned  and  destroyed  all  that  could 
not  conveniently  be  carried  away. 

Meanwhile,  mistrust  and  division  reigned  among 
the  councillors  of  the  unfortunate  Edgar,  and  the 
citizens  attributed  every  new  misfortune  to  the  treach- 
ery or  incapacity  of  his  advisers.  Rivalries  and 
jealousies  arose  between  Edwin  and  Morcar,  and  the 


90  LONDON. 

two  earls  finally  left  the  city.  Their  departure  de- 
prived the  military  operations  of  all  guidance  or 
authority.  Consternation  was  followed  by  panic,  and 
Stigand,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  first  adviser 
of  the  king,  was  the  first  to  throw  himself  on  the 
mercy  of  the  Conqueror.  Meeting  William  as  he 
crossed  the  Thames  at  Wallingford,  he  took  the  oath 
of  fealty  to  him  as  his  sovereign,  and  swore  to  sup- 
port him  in  his  pretensions.  This  defection  was  fol- 
lowed by  that  of  others,  and  finally  Edgar  himself, 
at  the  head  of  an  embassy,  which  was  composed  of 
Edwin  and  Morcar,  on  the  part  of  the  nobility;  the 
Archbishop  of  York  and  the  Bishops  of  Worcester 
and  Hereford,  on  the  part  of  the  clergy ;  and  a  depu- 
tation representing  the  principal  citizens  of  London, 
proceeded  to  Birkhamstead,  where  they  were  received 
in  audience  by  William  himself,  and  swore  allegiance 
to  the  Conqueror,  at  the  same  time  tendering  him  the 
crown.  This  embassy  to  Birkhamstead  was  the  last 
act  in  the  story  of  the  Saxon  domination — a  period 
of  struggle,  gradual  growth,  slow  development  of 
constitutional  principles,  and  steadily-increasing  com- 
mercial prosperity. 

Though  William's  advent  had  been  heralded,  as  it 
were,  by  blood  and  fire,  rape  and  plunder,  and  even 
his  coronation  at  Westminster  made  the  occasion  of  a 
skirmish  between  his  retainers  and  the  citizens  of  the 
city,  yet  William  sought  to  inaugurate  his  reign  by 
just  and  peaceful  measures,  and  London  was  not  last 


NOKMAN  LONDON.  91 

to  obtain  the  benefits  of  his  policy.  From  the  day 
of  his  entry,  the  city  seemed  to  acquire  a  new  life. 
A  charter  was  granted  to  London  by  the  Conqueror 
by  which  he  secured  to  the  city  all  her  liberties  and 
other  privileges.  The  charter  was  granted  to  Wil- 
liam, bishop,  and  Gosfrith,  portreeve,  and  is  worded 
in  a  peculiar  manner.  Besides  these  two  great  officers, 
he  greets  "all  the  burghers  in  London,  French  or 
English."  To  them  he  wishes  all  peace  and  good- 
will. The  original  of  this  charter — or  perhaps  it  is  a 
very  ancient  copy — is  still  preserved  in  the  archives 
of  Guildhall.  Its  full  text  is  as  follows:  "William, 
king,  greets  William,  bishop,  and  Gosfrith,  portreeve, 
and  all  the  burghers  within  London,  French  or  Eng- 
lish, friendly :  and  I  do  you  to  wit,  that  I  will  that 
ye  be  all  law  worthy,  there  were  in  king  Edward's 
day.  And  I  will  that  every  child  be  his  father's  heir, 
after  his  father's  day,  and  I  will  not  endure  that  any 
man  offer  any  wrong  to  you.  God  keep  you." 

The  object  of  the  charter  is  threefold,  and  the 
privileges  granted  thereby  are  inestimable,  as  may  be 
seen.  It,  first  of  all,  assures  the  citizens  that  they 
have  naught  to  fear  from  the  new  dynasty,  since  he 
gives  them  friendly  greeting;  secondly,  it  grants  that 
all  the  citizens  should  be  "  law  worthy,"  by  which  is 
meant  that  they  should  enjoy  the  privileges  of  freed- 
men  in  the  courts  of  justice — that  is,  the  right  of  trial 
by  jury  or  compurgators,  a  right  which  they  had  ac- 
quired under  Edward  the  Confessor — and  be  worthy 


92  LONDON. 

of  giving  evidence  in  court,  and  entitled  to  the  privi- 
lege of  bringing  in  their  friends  and  neighbors  to  do 
the  same ;  thirdly,  it  grants  the  right  of  inheritance — 
a  privilege  contrary  to  the  feudal  constitution  of  the 
Normans,  and,  in  fact,  to  the  very  spirit  of  feudalism. 
Though  ostensibly  granting  privileges,  William  se- 
cretly determined  that,  while  the  citizens  might  remain 
as  strongly  fortified  as  they  could  wish  against  foes 
from  without,  he  would  not  permit  them  to  maintain 
any  defences  against  himself.     To  accomplish  this  end, 
he  decided  upon  the  erection  of  a  great  fortress,  that 
he  might  control  the  whole  of  London,  and  he  se- 
lected for  that  purpose   that  place  where   he  could 
break  the  wall  without  weakening  the  defences  of  the 
city.     Now  it  happened  that  just  without  the  ditch,  a 
little  to  the  southeast,  and  beyond  Billingsgate,  a  piece 
of  foreshore  existed.     At  this  point  of  the  wall  was  a 
large   bastion,  either   of  Roman   origin   or   built   in 
Saxon  times  from  materials  taken  from  older  fortifica- 
tions.    It  was  here  that  William  determined  to  break 
the  wall,  and  replace  the  old  bastion  with  his  new- 
planned  fortress.     This  so-called  new  tower,  in  reality 
a  vast  fortress,  was  planned  to  cover  no  less  than 
twenty-six  acres,  of  which  twelve  would  be  within 
the  city  limits  and  fourteen  without;  thus  rather  less 
than  half  would  lie  within  the  former  city  boundaries. 
When  completed,  William  calculated  that  this  formi- 
dable castle — for  castle  it  practically  was — would  not 
only  overawe  the  citizens,  and  place  it  completely  be- 


Tower  of  London 


NOKMAN  LONDON.  93 

yond  their  power,  or  even  their  thoughts,  to  revolt  at 
his  authority,  but  would  also  completely  control  the 
traffic  of  the  river.  Thus  it  would  more  than  com- 
pensate in  strength  for  the  small  portion  of  the  wall 
removed  and  destroyed  to  make  a  way  for  its  con- 
struction. 

The  building  of  the  White  Tower,  which  forms,  as 
it  were,  the  centre  of  the  whole  structure,  was  not 
commenced  until  some  eleven  years  after  the  battle  of 
Senlac,  and  the  work  of  its  erection  was  entrusted  to 
Gundulf,  a  monk  of  the  Abbey  of  Bee,  in  Normandy, 
who  had  just  been  consecrated  Bishop  of  Rochester. 
Gundulf  arrived  in  London  in  1078,  and  sought 
quarters  at  the  house  of  a  friend,  a  certain  ^Edmer 
Anhsende.  He  applied  himself  at  once  to  the  work 
before  him ;  but  he  began  the  construction  of  this  vast 
pile  of  masonry  on  such  a  gigantic  scale  that,  though 
he  attained  the  advanced  age  of  eighty-four  years,  and 
thus  lived  thirty  years  after  the  starting  of  the  work, 
he  did  not  see  its  completion. 

The  present  external  appearance  of  the  Tower  is 
doubtless  very  unlike  what  it  originally  was,  and 
probably  no  fortress  of  its  age  has  undergone  greater 
transformations.  The  White  Tower,  however,  is  still 
in  great  part  as  Gundulf  left  it,  though  in  1663  the 
windows  were  altered  to  admit  of  more  light ;  and 
Sir  Christopher  Wren,  probably  in  the  belief  that  the 
Tower  had,  in  the  first  instance,  been  erected  by  Ju- 
lius Caesar,  introduced  classical  keystones.  It  consists 


94  LONDON. 

literally  of  four  walls,  terminating  in  turrets  at  the 
corners.  It  measures  one  hundred  and  seven  feet 
from  north  to  south,  and  ninety-six  feet  from  east  to 
west,  and  is  ninety-two  feet  from  the  ground  to  the 
crest  of  its  battlements.  The  walls  are  from  thirteen 
to  sixteen  feet  in  thickness.  This  ancient  keep  is  di- 
vided into  three  stories  of  timber  flooring,  on  the 
second  of  which  is  the  chapel  of  St.  John,  which  is 
one  of  the  finest  specimens  of  Norman  architecture  in 
England.  It  is  fifty-five  feet  in  length,  thirty-one  feet 
in  width  and  thirty-two  feet  to  the  crown  of  the  vault. 
The  nave  between  the  pillars  is  fourteen  feet  six 
inches  in  width,  while  the  aisles  are  about  half  the 
width  and  thirteen  feet  six  inches  in  height.  A  tri- 
forium,  extending  over  the  aisles  and  semicircular  east 
end,  was  used  by  the  consorts  of  Norman  and  suc- 
ceeding kings,  and  their  ladies,  when  attending  the  cel- 
ebration of  Mass,  so  that  they  might  worship  in  private, 
unseen  by  the  congregation  below.  This  triforium  is 
eleven  feet  and  nine  inches  in  height.  It  was  com- 
pletely dismantled  in  1558.  It  was  in  St.  John's 
Chapel  that,  at  the  creation  of  the  Order  of  the  Bath, 
by  Henry  IV.  at  the  time  of  his  coronation,  the 
forty-six  noblemen  and  gentlemen  who  were  the  first 
to  be  installed  as  knights,  performed  the  ceremony  of 
the  vigil  and  watched  their  armor  from  sunset  to  sun- 
rise. Here  also  did  Blackeubury,  while  kneeling  at 
prayer,  receive  Richard  ITI.'s  proposal  to  murder 
the  unfortunate  young  King  Edward  V.  and  his 


NORMAN  LONDON.  95 

brother,  the  Duke  of  York — a  proposal  wnich  Black- 
enbury  found  strength  to  reject.  And  here  also  did 
the  mortal  remains  of  that  illustrious  Princess  Eliz- 
abeth of  York,  consort  of  Henry  VII.,  lay  in  state, 
previous  to  her  magnificent  funeral  at  Westminster. 

The  Council  Chamber  in  the  second  story,  which 
communicates  directly  with  the  triforium  of  the  chapel, 
has  also  been  the  scene  of  a  number  of  important  his- 
toric events.  Here  it  was  that  Richard  II.  was  com- 
pelled to  abdicate  his  crown  in  favor  of  Henry  of 
Lancaster;  and  here  also  Hastings  was  denounced, 
arrested  and  hurried  to  the  block  by  Richard  III.,  the 
gallery,  cut  out  of  the  solid  wall,  and  which  runs  com- 
pletely round  the  Council  Chamber,  sen-ing  for  the 
concealment  of  the  soldiery  whom  the  king  caused  to 
be  stationed  there  to  carry  out  his  intentions. 

Beneath  the  chapel  is  a  vaulted  chamber,  now 
known  as  Queen  Elizabeth's  Armory,  and  which,  in 
reality,  forms  the  crypt  of  St.  John's  Chapel.  On 
the  north  side  is  a  cell  about  ten  feet  in  length  and 
eight  feet  in  width.  These  rooms  were  those  in  which 
Sir  Walter  Raleigh  was  imprisoned,  and  in  which  he 
wrote  his  "  History  of  the  World."  And  the  stone 
stairway  leading  up  to  St.  John's  Chapel  has  an  his- 
torical association  no  less  valued,  for  at  the  foot  of 
these  stair's  were  found,  in  July,  1674,  the  skeletons 
of  the  two  little  murdered  princes,  sons  of  Edward 
IV.  These  were  removed  in  1678  by  the  order  of 
Charles  II.,  and  placed  in  Westminster  Abbey,  the 


96  LONDON. 

sarcophagus  containing  these  royal  relics  being  against 
the  east  wall  of  the  north  side  of  Henry  VII.'s  chapel. 
Still  further  down  beneath  the  crypts  are  the  vaults, 
in  reality  dungeons  of  the  most  dismal  kind.  Their 
names  were  indeed  sufficiently  suggestive  of  discom- 
fort, for  while  one  went  by  the  name  of  "Cold 
Harbor,"  another  bore  the  equally  unpleasant  appella- 
tion of  "Little  Ease."  In  this  latter  Guy  Fawkes 
was  for  some  little  time  confined.  It  was,  in  fact,  but 
a  mere  hole  in  the  wall,  closed  by  a  heavy  door,  and 
so  small  that  the  prisoner  could  neither  lie  down  nor 
yet  sit  upright,  so  that  he  was  compelled  to  remain  in 
a  cramped  and  bent^-up  condition.  In  still  another 
dungeon  Prince  James  of  Scotland  was  confined  in 
1405.  In  still  another  was  kept  the  rack,  and  here 
suspects  and  traitors  could  be  pleasantly  tortured,  and 
confessions  extracted,  while  their  shrieks  and  screams 
were  entirely  unavailing  and  unheard.' 

The  chapel  and  its  appendages  are,  strange  to  say,  the 
only  walled  chambers  in  the  building,  for  all  the  other 
partitions  are  of  wood ;  and  it  is  equally  remarkable 
that  this,  the  keep  of  the  royal  castle,  iatended  origi- 
nally for  at  least  a  temporary  residence  of  the  sover- 
eign, and  a  refuge  in  time  of  trouble,  should  have 
been  built  so  as  to  possess  only  one  fireplace,  and  none 
of  the  conveniences  to  be  found  in  far  less' important 
Norman  residences  of  very  slightly  later  date.  Con- 
sidering the  immense  altitude  of  the  rooms,  which  are 
twenty-one  feet  high,  and  the  great  difficulty  of  heat- 


NORMAN  LONDON.  97 

ing  such  apartments,  even  with  modern  appliances, 
and  the  presence  of  innumerable  pillars  and  other  sup- 
ports for  the  roof,  it  can  scarcely  have  been  an  agree- 
able abode  for  the  sovereign  and  his  family.  In  fact, 
so  meagre  were  the  arrangements  for  any  kind  of  do- 
mestic comfort,  that  it  was  necessary  to  screen  off  par- 
titions to  secure  any  privacy  for  the  ladies.  It  was 
never  therefore  a  pleasant,  or  even,  possible,  residence 
for  the  court,  which  came  instead  to  be  permanently 
established  at  Westminster.  Up  to  the  tune  of 
Charles  II.  it  was  customary,  however,  for  the  British 
sovereign  to  spend  the  days  immediately  preceding  the 
coronation  in  the  Tower,  wrhich  thus  remained  for 
several  centuries  at  least  a  temporary  and  extraordi- 
nary residence  of  the  sovereign,  and  certain  apart- 
ments continued  to  be  specially  reserved  for  this  pur- 
pose. Here  he  or  she,  as  the  case  might  be,  was 
supposed  to  enter  into  a  spiritual  retreat,  and  prepare 
for  the  sacrament  of  the  anointment.  But  with 
Charles  II.  the  custom,  which  had  been  revived  for 
his  coronation,  became  obsolete,  and  the  White  Tower, 
originally  the  keep  of  the  royal  castle,  became,  in 
turn,  prison,  storehouse  for  the  reception  of  archives 
and  records  of  State,  until  these  were  removed  in 
1857  to  the  new  Record  Office,  and  was  finally  as- 
signed to  its  present  use — that  of  a  museum  of  armory. 
When  in  use  as  a  storehouse  for  archives,  the  White 
Tower  became  the  temporary  residence  of  many  a 
learned  and  distinguished  antiquary.  Lambert,  Sel- 
VOL.  I.— 7 


98  LONDON. 

den  and  the  Republican  Prynne  are  among  those  who 
lived  and  labored  within  its  walls,  while  the  northeast 
turret  was  used  by  Flamstead  for  astronomical  obser- 
vations until  the  erection  of  the  Greenwich  Observa- 
tory. To-day  the  upper  stories  of  the  White  Tower 
are  occupied  exclusively  by  the  museum  of  armory 
already  mentioned,  which  contains  one  of  the  finest 
collections  of  armor  extant,  affording  a  faithful  and 
chronological  picture  of  English  war  array  from  the 
time  of  Edward  I.  to  that  of  James  II. 

To  the  original  structure,  as  planned  by  William  of 
Normandy,  and  erected  under  the  direction  of  the 
monk  Gundulf,  immense  additions,  consisting  of  oufc- 
lying  buildings,  were  made  in  subsequent  reigns,  until 
it  came  to  be  that  the  White  Tower  was  completely 
surrounded  by  buildings,  constructed  at  different 
times,  these  being  again  encircled  by  a  great  outer 
wall,  and  the  whole  pentagonal  structure,  covering  an 
area  of  some  eighteen  acres,  being  in  turn  surrounded 
by  a  moat,  at  present  dry  and  used  for  a  parade  or 
drill  ground.  The  surrounding  buildings  of  the  so- 
called  Inner  Ward,  and  which  were  once  used  as 
State  prisons,  are  now  barracks ;  but  the  twelve 
towers,  so  famous  because  of  the  illustrious  prisoners 
therein  confined,  still  retain  their  historical  associa- 
tions. Their  names,  in  fact,  are  in  many  instances 
closely  connected  with  the  misfortunes  of  their  occu- 
pants. Thus  Bloody  Tower  begets  its  name  from  the 
fact  that  Edward  V.  and  his  brother,  the  Duke  of 


Armory,  Tower  of  London 


NORMAN  LONDON.  99 

York,  commonly  known  in  poetic  parlance  as  "the 
little  princes  of  the  Tower,"  were  imprisoned  there, 
and  there  assassinated  by  the  order  of" Richard  III. ; 
while  in  Bell  Tower  the  Princess  Elizabeth  was  con- 
fined by  her  sister,  Queen  Mary.  It  also  witnessed 
the  imprisonment  of  Lady  Arabella  Stewart,  who  was 
confined  here  for  some  years.  Beauchamp  Tower, 
which  was  probably  built  in  the  thirteenth  century, 
received  its  name  from  Thomas  de  Beauchamp,  Earl 
of  Warwick,  who  was  confined  here  in  1397,  previous 
to  his  banishment  to  the  Isle  of  Man.  Among  other 
illustrious  prisoners  detained  here  may  be  mentioned 
Ann  Boleyn,  in  1554;  John  Dudley,  Earl  of  War- 
wick, condemned  to  death  for  the  part  which  he  took 
in  the  conspiracy  to  place  Lady  Jane  Grey  on  the 
throne,  and  who,  though  reprieved,  died  shortly  after 
in  his  prison  room ;  Lord  Guildford  Dudley,  husband 
of  Lady  Jane  Grey,  in  1554 ;  the  unfortunate  princess 
herself,  who,  during  the  agony  of  her  prison  hours, 
sought  to  pass  the  time  by  carving  her  name,  "  Jane," 
on  the  wall  of  her  cell  in  1554  ;  Edmund  and  Arthur 
Poole,  the  great-grandsons  of  George,  Duke  of  Clarence, 
and  brother  of  Edward  IV.,  who  were  imprisoned  here 
from  1562  till  their  death  ;  Philip  Howard,  Earl  of 
Arundel,  who  was  beheaded  in  1573  for  aspiring  to 
the  hand  of  Mary,  Queen  of  Scots ;  and  Dr.  John 
Store,  Chancellor  of  Oxford  University  under  Queen 
Mary,  and  especially  known  for  his  firm  loyalty  to 
Rome  during  the  great  struggles  of  that  terrible 


100  LONDON. 

reign.     He  was  executed  at  Tyburn  for  high  treason 
in  1571. 

Devereux  Tower,  which  stands  at  the  northwest 
angle  of  the  inner  Ballium  wall,  derives  its  name 
from  Robert  Devereux,  Earl  of  Essex,  who  was 
its  most  illustrious  occupant.  In  Flint  Tower  the 
dungeons  are  of  so  terrible  a  character  that  it  re- 
ceived, and  has  retained  in  common  parlance  the 
designation  of  "  Little  Hell."  Bowyer  Tower,  which 
derives  its  name  from  the  fact  that  it  was  formerly 
the  residence  of  the  king's  bowyer,  or  "  Master  of  the 
King's  Bows,"  was  the  scene  of  the  death  of  the 
Duke  of  Clarence,  who,  if  popular  belief  is  to  be 
credited,  on  being  given  a  choice  of  methods  to  be 
employed  in  his  execution,  elected  drowning  in  a 
butt  of  malmsey,  and  was  accordingly  thus  executed. 
Brick  Tower  was  for  some  time  the  prison  of  Lady 
Jane  Grey,  though  the  principal  part  of  her  con- 
finement was  spent  in  Beauchamp  Tower.  Mar- 
tin or  Jewel  Tower  was  formerly  used  as  a  place 
of  safe-keeping  for  the  regalia  of  England,  which 
is  now,  however,  kept  in  Wakefield  Tower.  Con- 
stable and  Broad  Arrow  Towers  served  the  same 
purpose  at  one  time  of  their  history,  while  Salt 
Tower,  which  is  one  of  the  most  ancient,  and  pro- 
bably of  Norman  origin,  contains  a  curious  sphere, 
on  the  walls  of  which  are  engraved  the  zodiacal 
signs,  and  which  is  the  work  of  the  famous  astrolo- 
ger and  magician,  Hugh  Draper  of  Bristol,  who,  com- 


NOKMAN  LONDON.  101 

mitted  on  the  charge  of  sorcery,  was  here  imprisoned 
in  1561. 

Wakefield  Tower,  which  derives  its  name  from  the 
imprisonment  of  the  "  Yorkists/'  is  that  in  which  are 
now  kept  the  crown  jewels.  These  are  under  the 
care  of  the  Master  of  the  Jewel  House,  an  officer 
who  is  charged  with  the  duty  of  custodian  of  the 
regalia.  This  officer  has,  as  one  of  his  prerogatives, 
the  appointment  of  the  king's  goldsmith,  and  is 
esteemed  the  first  knight  bachelor  of  England,  and 
accorded  that  precedence.  The  office  was  held  by 
Thomas  Cromwell,  afterwards  Earl  of  Essex.  The 
perquisites  were  at  one  time  very  large,  but  came  to 
be  so  greatly  diminished  after  the  restoration  that  Sir 
Gilbert  Talbot,  who  then  held  the  office,  was  per- 
mitted by  the  king  to  tax  strangers  for  a  small  mone- 
tary consideration.  The  office  is  now  in  abeyance, 
and  the  custody  of  the  jewels,  as  well  as  of  the  Tower 
itself,  belongs  to  the  Queen's  Yeomen  of  the  Guard,  a 
corps  comjx)sed  of  aged  war  veterans,  who  by  their 
quaint  dress  add  greatly  to  the  historic  interest  of  the 
scene.  They  are  commonly  spoken  of  as  "  beef-eaters  " 
— which,  it  is  almost  needless  to  remark,  is  but  a  cor- 
ruption of  "biiffetiers" — for  when  the  Tower  was  a 
royal  residence,  their  duties  included  attendance  on 
the  royal  table.  Around  the  Inner  Ward,  as  it  is 
called,  and  as  it  were  encircling  it,  is  an  outer  wall, 
also  strengthened  by  towers,  the  most  ini}x>rtant  of 
which,  and  first  in  jxjiut  of  interest,  is  St.  Thomas' 


102  LONDON. 

Tower,  under  which  is  the  archway  known  as 
Traitor's  Gate,  a  double  gateway  opening  on  to  the 
Thames,  and  formerly  used  for  the  reception  of  pris- 
oners of  rank.  Entrance  to  the  Tower  is  now  had 
by  means  of  a  bridge  across  the  moat,  which  bridge  is 
flanked  by  two  towers,  which  bear  the  name  of  Middle 
Tower  and  By  ward  Tower. 

Among  those  eminent  persons  who  have  at  one 
time  or  other  been  confined  in  the  Tower,  and  whose 
names  have  not  already  been  mentioned,  are  Wallace, 
Roger  Mortimer,  1324 ;  John,  king  of  France ; 
Charles,  Duke  of  Orleans,  father  of  Louis  XII., 
and  who  was  one  of  the  State  prisoners  taken  at  the 
battle  of  Agincourt ;  Katherine  Howard,  fourth  wife 
of  Henry  VIII.,  who,  like  one  of  her  predecessors  in 
that  monarch's  affections,  was  executed  within  the 
Tower;  Lady  Rochford,  who  was  executed  at  the 
same  time ;  Sir  Thomas  More,  Archbishop  Cranmer, 
Protector  Somerset,  1551-'52;  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt, 
beheaded  on  Tower  Hill,  April  11,  1554;  William 
Seymour,  husband  of  Arabella  Stewart,  and  after- 
wards Duke  of  Somerset;  Sir  Thomas  Overbury,  who, 
committed  to  the  Tower  on  April  21,  1013,  was  found 
dead  in  his  cell  on  the  September  14  following,  hav- 
ing been  poisoned  at  the  instigation  of  the  Countess 
of  Somerset;  Sir  John  Eliot,  who  wrote  here  his 
"Monarchy  of  Man,"  and  who  died  in  the  Tower, 
November  27,  1632;  the  Earl  of  Strafford,  1641; 
Archbishop  Laud,  1640-'43 ;  Lucy  Barlow,  the 


Traitor's  Gate,  Tower  of  London 


NORMAN  LONDON.  103 

mother  of  the  Duke  of  Monmouth ;  Sir  William  Dave- 
nant;  George  Villiers,  second  Duke  of  Buckingham; 
Sir  Harry  Vane  the  Younger,  Sir  William  Coventry, 
the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury,  the  Earl  of  Salisbury,  1670; 
William,  Lord  Russell,  1683;  Algernon  Sidney,  1683; 
the  Lord  Chancellor  Jeffreys,  1688;  the  great  Duke 
of  Marlborough,  1692;  Sir  Robert  Walpole,  1712; 
Harley,  Earl  of  Oxford,  1715;  William  Shippen, 
Bishop  Atterbury,  1722;  Dr.  Freind,  who  here  wrote 
his  "  History  of  Medicine  ; "  the  Earl  of  Derwent- 
water  and  Lord  Kenmure,  who  were  both  executed 
on  Tower  Hill ;  the  Earl  of  Nithsdale,  who  escaped 
from  the  Tower  on  February  28,  1715,  dressed  as  a 
woman,  in  a  cloak  and  hood  provided  by  his  wife, 
and  which  were  for  that  reason  for  some  time  after 
called  nithsdales;  Lord  Kilmarnock,  Lord  Balme- 
rino,  Lord  Lovat,  who  perished  at  the  block,  on  April 
9,  1747,  which  block  is  still  preserved  in  the  armory; 
John  Wilkes,  1752;  Lord  George  Gordon,  1780; 
Sir  Francis  Burdett,  1810,  and  lastly  the  notorious 
Arthur  Thistlewood,  famous  for  his  connection  in  the 
Cato  Street  conspiracy.  Of  the  persons  born  in  the 
Tower,  the  most  noted  are  probably  Carew  Raleigh, 
son  of  Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  Mrs.  Hutchinson,  the 
biographer  of  her  husband,  and  the  Countess  of  Bed- 
ford, daughter  of  the  infamous  Countess  of  Somerset, 
and  mother  of  William,  Lord  Russell. 

In  building  the  Tower,  William  the  Conqueror  had, 
as  wo  have  seen,  as  his  object  the  erection  of  a  citadel 


104  LONDON. 

which  would  serve  not  only  as  a  residence  in  time  of 
danger,  but  as  a  fortress,  from  which  a  determined 
and  organized  resistance  could  be  made  in  case  of  a 
rising  against  himself.  Not  satisfied  with  this  move, 
however,  he  resolved  to  have,  as  it  were,  an  accurate 
census  of  all  the  landowners  in  the  kingdom,  and  of 
their  possessions  and  privileges,  that  he  might  the  bet- 
ter understand  the  situation  and  know  best  how  to 
control  them.  To  this  end,  he  caused  to  be  compiled 
the  now  famous  Doomsday  Book.  The  reason  for 
which  London  and  its  inhabitants  are  exempted  from 
it  is  not  very  clear.  It  has  been  urged,  as  an  expla- 
nation, that  London  was  not  a  demesne,  and  was  not 
held  by  any  overlord  whatsoever;  but  this  is  hardly 
satisfactory,  and  it  seems  difficult  to  reconcile  the  al- 
lowing of  such  a  claim  of  independence  with  what  we 
know  of  the  character  of  the  Conqueror.  Whatever 
may  be  said,  however,  of  William  of  Normandy,  that 
his  ambitions  were  destructive  to  his  sense  of  justice, 
that  his  revengeful  anger  blinded  him  to  all  sense  of 
charity,  and  that  his  avarice  placed  upon  the  people  a 
heavier  burden  than  they  already  bore,  yet  he  was 
righteous  in  his  administration,  stern  and  inflexible  in 
his  will  and  undaunted  in  his  courage,  and  to  him 
London  owed  a  renewed  prosperity. 

But  he  was  as  judicious  an  organizer  as  he  was  am- 
bitious as  a  builder,  and  one  of  the  principal  munic- 
ipal achievements  of  his  reign  was  perhaps  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  special  quarter  for  the  Jews.  Many  of 


NORMAN  LONDON.  105 

these  unfortunates  had  followed  in  his  wake  from 
Rouen,  and  finding  that  the  city  was  in  a  state  of  con- 
stant turmoil  from  the  frays  between  them  and  the 
citizens,  which  were  of  almost  daily  occurrence,  he 
decided  that  to  separate  them  as  much  as  was  possible 
was  essential  to  the  peace  and  good  government  of  the 
city.  Accordingly  a  certain  space  was  allotted  to 
them  as  a  place  of  residence,  and  in  which  to  conduct 
their  business.  Their  limitations  were  practically 
those  of  one  street,  then  a  lane,  running  from  the 
north  side  of  the  Poultry  to  what  is  now  Gresham 
Street,  and  a  short  distance  down  those  lanes  which 
led  immediately  out  of  it  on  either  hand.  From  the 
fact  that  the  Jews  subsequently  sought  more  congenial 
and  obscure  quarters,  in  the  neighborhood  of  the 
Tower,  the  street  of  which  we  have  spoken  came  as 
early  as  1270  to  be  called  the  Old  Jewry,  to  distin- 
guish it  from  the  New  Jewry,  their  then  actual  habi- 
tation. 

The  most  distinguishing  feature  of  William  of  Nor- 
mandy's reign,  at  least  as  regards  its  influence  on  the 
character  of  the  city's  development,  was  the  establish- 
ment under  his  auspices  of  several  of  those  great 
monastic  institutions  which  were  subsequently  so 
numerous,  and  which  rose  to  such  wealth  and  power 
as  to  become,  according  to  opinion,  the  glory  and  pride 
of  the  royal  city  of  England,  or  the  overshadow  which 
threatened  the  city's  liberties  and  intellectual  and 
economic  progression.  Already,  in  the  last  year  of 


106  LONDON. 

the  Saxon  rule,  the  College  of  St.  Martin-le-Grand 
had,  as  we  have  seen,  in  1056,  been  established,  and 
the  Conqueror  confirmed  its  rights  in  the  second  year 
of  his  reign,  and  gave  the  dean  and  secular  clergy  con- 
nected therewith  more  laud,  and  added  to  their  privi- 
leges. In  1082  a  number  of  monks  of  the  great 
Monastic  Order  of  St.  Benedict,  quite  distinct  from 
those  already  at  Westminster,  came  over  to  England — 
if  not  by  William's  express  invitation,  at  least  with 
his  permission  and  under  his  august  patronage — and, 
establishing  themselves  at  Bermondsey  (Bearmund-ey 
or  Island),  there  founded  a  house  of  their  illustrious 
order.  This  house,  which  was  an  offshoot,  as  it  were, 
of  the  famous  Abbey  of  Cluny,  was  dependent  for  its 
government  and  its  support  on  the  mother  house  in 
France.  The  foundation  was  greatly  facilitated  by 
the  beneficent  assistance  and  protection  of  one 
Aylwin  Child,  a  citizen  of  London,  to  whom,  in 
fact,  entire  credit  is  often  given  for  the  establishment 
itself. 

This  famous  abbey,  for  abbey  it  soon  became,  was, 
as  has  been  said,  in  Bermondsey — a  river  parish  on 
the  Surrey  side  in  the  hundred  of  Brixton.  It  shortly 
acquired  special  renown  in  connection  with  the  famous 
cross  which  was  the  site  of  many  pilgrimages  from 
the  city  itself  and  the  neighboring  towns.  The  cross 
seems  to  have  been  situated  on  the  spot  which  is  now 
the  conjunction  of  Bermondsey  and  Tooley  Streets, 
adjoining  the  present  London  Bridge  terminus  of  the 


NORMAN  LONDON.  107 

London,  Chatham  and  Dover  Railway.  In  1094 
William  II.,  surnamed  Rufus,  son  of  the  Conqueror, 
gave  the  manor  of  Bermondsey  to  the  abbey,  which 
retained  possession  of  the  same  until  the  dissolution 
of  the  religious  houses  under  Henry  VIII. 

To  the  foundation  of  the  abbey  of  Bermondsey  other 
monastic  foundations  soon  followed,  and,  with  these,  a 
great  change  was  made  in  the  character  of  the  city 
and  its  neighborhood,  and  London,  which  had  in 
Saxon  times  presented  only  a  rather  mean  aggregation 
of  unimportant  houses,  with  some  scattered  church 
edifices  of  more  or  less  architectural  merit,  came  now 
to  be  a  city  possessing  features  of  considerable  archi- 
tectural proportions  and  distinction.  What  the  city 
gained  in  one  way  it  lost,  however,  in  another.  With 
the  removal  of  Edward  the  Confessor  and  his  court  to 
Westminster,  the  position  of  London  as  the  royal  city 
of  England  had  begun  to  change.  After  the  advent 
of  William  of  Normandy  it  came  to  be  completely 
altered;  for  while  the  building  of  the  Tower  would 
impress  one  with  the  idea  that  he  intended  that  to  be 
and  to  remain  the  principal  residence  of  the  sovereign, 
yet  actually  the  kings  and  queens  made  only  a  very 
occasional  stay  in  the  city,  and  it  ceased  to  be  in  any 
sense  the  royal  residence.  The  palace  of  TEthelstan 
and  of  the  later  Anglo-Saxon  kings  existed,  it  is  true, 
up  to  the  first  of  the  great  fires,  but  it  was  untenanted, 
and  though  William  and  his  successors,  when  they 
had  any  very  special  business  in  the  city,  resided  at 


108  LONDON. 

the  Tower,  yet  Westminster  was  in  fact  the  royal  seat 
and  their  principal  habitation. 

The  Conqueror  died  on  the  9th  of  September,  1087, 
and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  William,  surnamed  Ru- 
fus,  on  account  of  his  red  hair.  He  continued  the 
great  works  of  his  father  at  the  Tower  and  throughout 
the  city,  and  entered  even  upon  greater  works  at 
Westminster.  Appreciating  the  great  inconveniences 
experienced  by  the  court  and  its  retainers  while  so- 
journing in  the  Tower,  and  how  absolutely  inadequate 
would  be  its  accommodations  even  when  completed,  he 
decided  upon  the  erection  at  Westminster  of  a  palace 
which  would  be  suitable  as  a  royal  residence,  and  com- 
bine the  conditions  necessary  in  those  turbulent  times 
of  a  stronghold,  with  all  the  comforts  then  obtainable 
of  a  regal  habitation.  It  was  to  meet  these  require- 
ments that  the  new  palace  of  Westminster  was  com- 
menced by  him  adjoining  that  which  owed  its  erection 
to  Edward  the  Confessor. 

Of  this  famous  palace,  the  principal  seat  of  the 
kings  of  England  from  the  time  of  the  Conquest  to 
that  of  Henry  VIII.,  only  Westminster  Hall  and  the 
crypts  of  St.  Stephen's  Chapel  remain.  Westminster 
Hall  was  built  by  William  Rufus,  and  is  supposed  to 
have  had  a  nave  and  aisles  divided  by  timber  ports. 
The  hall,  which  became  the  principal  banqueting- 
room  of  the  palace,  was  enlarged  and  heightened  under 
Richard  II.,  who  caused  the  walls  to  be  carried  up 
two  feet  higher,  the  windows  altered,  a  new  roof  con- 


NORMAN  LONDON.  109 

structed  and  a  stately  porch  added.  These  improve- 
ments were  entrusted  by  Richard  II.  to  Henry  de 
Teveley,  one  of  the  most  famous  master  masons  of  the 
time.  The  stone  moulding,  or  string  course,  which 
runs  around  the  hall  is  preserved  to  this  day,  and  ex- 
hibits the  white  hart  couchant — that  favorite  device 
of  Richard  II.  The  roof  is  still  the  same  which  was 
set  up  by  Henry  de  Teveley,  and,  with  its  oak  ham- 
mer beams,  carved  with  angels,  held  to  be  one  of  the 
finest  of  its  kind  in  England.  In  describing  it,  it  has 
been  spoken  of  as  "cobwebless  beams,"  in  refer- 
ence to  a  popular  tradition  that  spiders  cannot  live  in 
Irish  oak.  This  noble  hall,  which  is  two  hundred 
and  ninety  feet  in  length  by  sixty-eight  in  breadth, 
and  which  is  said  to  be  one  of  the  largest  apartments 
in  the  world  unsupported  by  pillars,  besides  being 
the  banquet  ing-hall  of  the  palace,  was  that  wherein 
the  Grand  Councils  of  the  king  and  the  early  Par- 
liaments were  held.  Here  the  Law  Courts  were 
formerly  opened,  the  Court  of  the  Exchequer  at 
the  entrance  end,  and  the  King's  Bench  and  Courts 
of  Chancery  at  the  end  opposite ;  and  here,  in  more 
spacious  chambers  erected  by  Sir  John  Soaue,  a  little 
to  the  west  of  Westminster  Hall,  they  continued  to 
be  held  until  they  were  finally  removed  to  the  new 
Law  Courts  in  1882.  These  courts  were :  The  High 
Court  of  Chancery,  presided  over  by  the  Lord  Chancel- 
lor ;  the  Court  of  the  King  or  Queen's  Bench,  in  which 
the  Lord  Chief  Justice  sat;  the  Court  of  the  Common 


110  LONDON. 

Pleas,  presided  over  by  the  Lord  Chief  Justice,  and 
the  Court  of  the  Exchequer,  presided  over  by  the 
Lord  Chief  Baron. 

Besides  the  Law  Courts,  however,  Westminster 
Hall  seems  also  to  have  harbored  the  stalls  of  any 
number  of  booksellers,  law  stationers,  sempstresses, 
and  dealers  in  all  manner  of  toys  and  small  wares, 
the  rents  and  profits  of  which  stalls  belonged  by  an 
ancient  right  to  that  officer  who  is  known  as  the 
Warden  of  the  Fleet.  It  is  difficult,  indeed,  for  the 
modern  mind  to  picture  the  curious  confusion  which 
must  have  prevailed  in  an  agglomeration  so  varied 
and  peculiar,  and  in  such  a  singular  mixture  of  solem- 
nity and  quaint  frivolity.  The  scene  would  doubt- 
less have  been  distressing  to  every  one  trained  to 
habits  of  method  and  symmetry.  Yet  here  some  of 
the  great  scenes  of  history  were  enacted.  Here,  on  a 
scaffolding  erected  for  the  purpose,  Ann  Boleyn  sat,  a 
witness  to  her  trial,  where  Sir  William  Wallace  and 
Sir  Thomas  More  had  stood  before  the  bar;  and 
here,  again,  the  great  Protector  Somerset  listened  to 
his  doom.  Here  the  notorious  Earl  and  Countess  of 
Somerset,  in  the  days  of  James  I.,  stood  trial  for  the 
murder  of  Sir  Thomas  Overbury.  Here  sat  the  so- 
called  High  Court  of  Justice  while  that  lamentable 
and  disgraceful  farce,  the  trial  of  Charles  I.,  was  en- 
acted; and  here  sat  the  king  and  martyr,  with  the 
Naseby  banners  above  his  head.  Here  the  astrologer 
Lily,  who  was  present  on  that  great  occasion,  saw  the 


NORMAN  LONDON.  HI 

silver  top  fall  from  the  king's  staff;  and  those  near 
her  heard  Lady  Fairfax  exclaim,  when  her  husband's 
name  was  called,  "  He  has  more  wit  than  to  be  here !" 
Here  the  king's  most  relentless  adversary,  the  usurper 
Cromwell,  had  himself  proclaimed  as  Lord  Protector ; 
and  here,  only  four  years  later,  was  his  head  brought, 
to  be  set  up  on  a  pole  at  the  top  of  the  hall,  fronting 
the  palace  yard,  flanked  by  the  skulls  of  other  traitors. 
Here,  in  the  reign  of  James  II.,  the  seven  bishops 
were  acquitted;  and  here  the  great  preacher,  Dr. 
Sacheverel,  was  tried  and  found  guilty  by  a  majority 
of  seventeen.  Here  the  rebel  lords,  Kilmarnock, 
Lovat  and  Balmerino,  were  heard  and  condemned  in 
1745.  Here  Lord  Byron,  Lord  Ferrers  and  the  in- 
famous Duchess  of  Kingston  were  tried,  the  first  for 
killing  Mr.  Chaworth,  the  second  for  the  murder  of 
his  steward,  and  the  third  for  bigamy.  Here  Warren 
Hastings  was  tried,  and  Burke  and  Sheridan  grew 
eloquent  in  his  prosecution  and  defence;  and  here, 
again,  Lord  Mellville  was  tried,  in  1806.  This  was 
the  last  public  trial  in  Westminster  Hall.  This  famous 
hall,  which  served  successively  as  banqueting-room 
and  court  of  justice,  was  the  scene  of  the  coronation 
banquet  of  English  sovereigns  down  to  the  accession 
of  George  IV.,  whose  coronation  banquet  was  the  last 
served,  with  all  the  mediaeval  ceremonial,  in  this  an- 
cient and  historic  chamber. 

St.  Stephen's  Chapel  was  added  to  the  palace  under 
Stephen  I.,  for  a  dean  and  canons.     The  chapel  was 


112  LONDON. 

rebuilt  in  the  reign  of  Edward  II.,  between  1320  and 
1322,  and  was  regarded  until  its  destruction  as  a  very 
excellent  example  of  decorated  architecture.  It  served 
as  the  Hall  of  Assembly  of  the  Commons,  while  the 
Lords  assembled  in  what  was  the  old  Court  of  Re- 
quests. The  crypt  and  the  chapel  of  Westminster 
Hall  are  to-day  the  only  remains  of  the  old  palace, 
which  was  almost  totally  destroyed  by  fire  in  1512; 
and  Henry  VIII.,  after  Wolsey's  disgrace,  moved  to 
the  tatter's  palace  at  Whitehall,  which  thenceforth  be- 
came the  royal  residence,  until  the  court  removed  to 
St.  James'.  Portions  of  the  old  palace,  however,  re- 
mained until  the  burning  of  the  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment, in  1834,  in  which  the  famous  Painted  Chamber, 
the  Star  Chamber,  St.  Stephen's  Chapel  and  the  clois- 
ters, the  cellar  of  Guy  Fawkes  celebrity,  the  re- 
nowned Armada  Hangings,  and  other  remaining  ves- 
tiges of  the  original  building,  were  destroyed.  Other 
apartments  of  the  old  palace  were  designated  as  the 
Antioch  Chamber,  the  Caged  Chamber,  the  Chamber 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Great  Exchequer  Chamber, 
and  other  names  equally  fanciful  or  descriptive. 

The  reign  of  William  II.  had  commenced  under 
unpleasant  auspices.  The  second  of  the  great  London 
fires  had  caused  much  loss  and  consternation  in  the 
city,  and  the  Cathedral  Church  of  St.  Paul  had  for 
the  second  time  suffered  destruction  under  flames. 
Burned  in  961,  under  Edgar,  surnamed  the  Peaceable, 
it  had  been  rebuilt  almost  within  a  year;  nor  was 


NORMAN  LONDON.  113 

William  II.  less  forward  in  his  zeal  for  its  prompt  re- 
construction. Indeed,  he  did  much  for  the  ecclesias- 
tical edifice,  not  only  in  the  city,  but  at  Westminster. 
The  burden  of  these  works  was  shared  by  the  city 
and  county  alike,  and  so  great  were  they  that  the 
chronicle  has  it  that  on  the  arrival  in  London  of 
Henry  I.,  after  William's  death,  he  was  made  to 
swear,  before  they  would  crown  him,  that  he  would 
withdraw  all  further  taxes  for  construction. 

Just  how  far  the  city  was  concerned  in  the  election 
of  Henry,  which  occurred  at  Winchester,  it  is  difficult 
to  say,  but  that  he  owed  it  some  debt  of  gratitude  is 
evident  by  the  privileges  and  liberties  which  he 
granted  and  conferred  upon  the  citizens.  William  II. 
was  killed  on  Thursday,  August  2,  1100.  He  was 
buried  next  day  in  the  Cathedral  of  Winchester.  On 
Saturday  Henry  entered  London,  and  his  coronation 
took  place  on  Sunday,  the  day  following. 

Henry's  charter  was,  perhaps,  even  more  important 
in  the  history  of  the  city's  liberties  than  that  of  his 
father,  William  of  Normandy ;  for,  not  only  did  he 
absolve  the  citizens  from  the  payment  of  any  of  the 
various  forms  of  feudal  service  and  fines,  but  he 
granted  to  the  city  the  revenues  of  Middlesex,  turned 
the  entire  county  over  to  them  to  farm  as  they  saw  fit, 
preserving  the  payment  of  the  merely  nominal  rent 
of  three  hundred  pounds  per  annum,  and  permitted 
them  the  appointment  of  a  sheriff  to  receive  demesne 
dues.  They  had  already  acquired  the  right  of  elect- 
VOL.  I. -8 


1 14  LONDON. 

ing  their  own  portreeve  and  sheriff.  This  was  au 
additional  privilege.  They  were  also  given  leave  to 
appoint  their  own  justiciar,  that  they  might  be  re- 
lieved of  ever  having  to  appeal  to  any  court  outside 
the  city.  This  officer  has  been  held  to  have  had  the 
authority  which  in  1189  devolved  upon  the  mayor; 
but  it  is  more  likely  that  the  office  of  portreeve  more 
closely  resembled  the  subsequent  mayoralty,  and,  in- 
deed, the  sheriffs  of  London  and  Middlesex  were  his 
deputies,  as  they  afterwards  became  those  of  the 
mayor.  Besides  the  privileges  already  mentioned, 
they  were  accorded  the  royal  privilege  of  hunting  in 
the  forests  of  Middlesex  and  the  Chiltern  Hills. 

But  Henry  did  not  confine  his  generosity  to  the 
city  or  its  citizens,  for  he  gave  a  charter  to  the  Augus- 
tinian  Priory  of  the  Holy  Trinity  at  Aldgate,  which 
had  been  founded  by  Matilda,  his  wife,  transferring  to 
it  thereby  the  privileges  of  the  old  Knighten  Guild, 
which  has  been  already  mentioned  as  having  come 
into  existence  under  ^Ethelstan ;  and  the  prior  of  the 
fraternity  attached  to  the  church  was  at  the  same  time 
an  alderman  and  the  presiding  officer  of  the  guild. 
But  Holy  Trinity  was  not  the  only  religious  house  to 
profit  by  Henry's  generosity,  for  the  Augustinian 
Priory  of  St.  Mary  Overies,  in  Southwark,  was 
largely  helped  to  its  prosperity  by  the  king's  patron- 
age. This  priory  belonged  to  the  Order  of  the  Regu- 
lar Canons  of  St.  Augustiu,  and  had  been  established 
in  1106,  through  the  efforts  and  munificence  of  two 


NORMAN  LONDON.  H5 

Norman  knights,  William  Pont  de  1'Arche  and  Wil- 
liam Dawncey;  while  the  priory  church,  which  was 
dedicated  to  the  Holy  Saviour,  was  built  in  the  same 
year  by  the  efforts  of  Giffard,  Bishop  of  Winchester. 
The  adjoining  chapel  was  erected  in  1238  by  Peter  de 
Rupibus,  then  Bishop  of  Winchester.  At  the  begin- 
ning of  the  fifteenth  century,  another  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester, Cardinal  Beaufort,  son  of  John  of  Gaunt, 
spent  large  sums  of  money  on  improvements  and  re- 
pairs; and  it  was  in  this  church  that,  on  February  2, 
1424— '25,  the  marriage  of  James  I.  of  Scotland  and 
Joanna  Beaufort  was  celebrated  with  much  pomp  and 
ceremony,  while  the  marriage  feast  was  held  in  the 
neighboring  palace  of  the  Bishop  of  Winchester.  But 
a  few  years  later — that  is,  in  1469 — under  Henry  de 
Burton,  prior,  the  stone  roof  of  the  nave  fell  in,  and 
was  replaced  by  a  wooden  one,  which  lasted  until  the 
last  century. 

By  far  the  most  important,  however,  of  the  great 
monastic  establishments  which  had  their  origin  in  the 
reign  of  Henry  I.  was  that  of  St.  Bartholomew  the 
Great.  This  famous  priory,  which  stood  somewhat  to 
the  northwest  of  the  city,  near  Aldersgate,  near  Smith- 
field,  was  founded  by  a  certain  Rahere,  a  gentleman 
of  gentle  lineage,  who  had  been  converted  to  a  re- 
ligious life  while  on  a  pilgrimage  at  Rome,  and  there 
joined  the  Order  of  the  Regular  Canons  of  St.  Angus- 
tin.  On  his  return  to  England,  he  founded  a  com- 
munity of  that  order ;  and,  connected  with  the  priory, 


116  LONDON. 

was  established  at  the  same  time  that  hospital  which 
obtained  subsequently  such  historic  renown.  The 
hospital  had  an  independent  constitution  and  separate 
estate,  but  for  purposes  of  control  and  government 
was  under  the  priory.  It  had  a  master,  eight  breth- 
ren and  four  sisters,  and  its  community  was  also 
under  the  rule  of  St.  Augustin.  It  was  from  its 
foundation  a  hospital  for  the  sick,  not  a  mere  alms- 
house,  as  is  sometimes  supposed,  and  this  is  distinctly 
asserted  in  a  grant  of  privileges  made  to  it  by  Ed- 
ward III.  The  relations  of  the  priory  to  the  hospital 
were  revised  by  several  bishops  of  London — that  is, 
by  Richard  de  Ely,  who  held  the  episcopal  authority 
in  1197;  by  Eustace  de  Falconberg  in  1224;  and 
again  by  Simon  de  Sudbury  in  1373 — the  two  foun- 
dations being  finally  separated  in  1537,  at  the  disso- 
lution of  the  priory. 

The  priory  church  was  also  founded  by  the  same 
Rahere  and  at  the  same  time,  and  completed  in  1123. 
Though  not  the  oldest  foundation,  since  the  Saxon 
foundations  antedate  it  by  several  centuries,  yet,  as 
most  of  these  suffered  either  destruction  or  severe 
damage  in  succeeding  fires,  and  were  either  torn  down 
or  rebuilt,  the  Church  of  St.  Bartholomew  the  Great 
is  probably  the  oldest  church  edifice  in  London.  It 
is  so  closely  surrounded  by  houses  that  visitors  often 
seek  it  in  vain  when  only  a  few  yards  from  it.  A 
dilapidated,  but  still  beautiful  gateway,  of  early  Eng- 
lish style,  leads  from  near  the  end  of  Duke  Street 


NOKMAN  LONDON.  117 

into  the  church.  This  gateway  is  overhung  by  a  com- 
paratively modern  red-brick  house,  and  though  the 
pillars  of  the  archway  have  disappeared,  part  of  their 
circular  capitals  remain,  and  the  so-called  tooth 
mouldings  which  adorn  the  arch  itself  are  in  them- 
selves indicative  of  its  age,  and  show  that  this  vener- 
able entrance  is  coeval  with  the  barons'  war.  The 
interior,  while  solemn  in  its  simplicity,  is  nevertheless 
impressive.  Of  the  four  styles  of  architecture  which 
are  to  be  found  in  England,  none,  in  fact,  is  more 
impressive  than  the  Norman.  The  round  arches  and 
huge  circular  piers  of  the  period  are  productive  of 
strong  architectural  effects,  and  seem  indicative,  even 
more  so  than  the  Gothic,  perhaps,  of  an  awe  born  of 
a  powerful  and  undying  faith.  The  church  contains 
many  tombs  and  monuments,  the  principal  of  which 
is,  of  course,  that  of  the  founder  itself,  Rahere,  the 
first  prior.  It  stands  in  the  easternmost  bay,  before 
the  apse  on  the  north  side.  The  effigy  represents 
Rahere,  with  the  clean-shaven  crown  and  the  black 
robe  of  a  Regular  Canon  of  St.  Augustin.  His  well- 
defined  features  show  him  to  have  been  a  man  of  dis- 
tinguished intelligence  and  personality.  His  hands 
are  in  the  attitude  of  prayer,  and  an  angel  at  his  feet 
holds  a  shield,  bearing  two  lions,  passant  gardant, 
and  two  crowns. 

As  is  natural,  so  ancient  an  edifice  has  undergone  a 
variety  of  vicissitudes,  and  many  changes  were  at- 
tempted and  some  few  effected  in  its  long  history.  It 


118  LONDON. 

was  the  last  prior,  a  certain  Bolton,  who  endeavored 
to  change  the  character  of  the  edifice,  transforming 
the  Norman  into  the  perpendicular,  as  William  do 
Wyckham  did  for  the  Winchester  Cathedral.  To 
this  end,  he  caused  to  be  constructed  a  new  nave  in 
the  perpendicular  style  of  architecture,  and  spoiled  the 
apse,  cut  the  corbels  of  the  western  tower  arch  into 
perpendicular  mouldings,  destroying  the  bolder  and 
more  appropriate  Norman  corbel  table  which  matched 
that  still  preserved  to  us  in  the  eastern  arch.  Strange 
to  say,  it  is  his  alterations  which,  in  the  course  of 
ages,  have  met  with  annihilation,  so  that  all  that  has 
been  destroyed  was  more  modern  that  what  remains, 
and  we  see  the  church  much  as  it  was  at  the  time  of 
the  founder's  death  in  1143.  The  tower  was  built, 
however,  as  late  as  1628,  and  the  whole  edifice,  which 
had  fallen  into  a  grievous  state  of  disrepair,  was  re- 
stored, under  the  directions  of  Mr.  T.  Hayter  Lewis 
and  Mr.  William  Slater,  in  1863-'66.  The  old  work 
was,  as  far  as  possible,  left  untouched.  Again,  in 
1885,  another  most  important  restoration,  that  of  the 
apse,  was  commenced  from  a  design  of  Mr.  Ashon 
Webb. 

Adjoining  the  church  is  the  old  graveyard.  The 
bases  of  some  early  English  pillars  on  the  right  of  the 
pathway  indicate  the  existence  at  one  time  of  a  continu- 
ous building  from  the  Smithfield  gate  to  the  church  it- 
self. There  was  a  graveyard  here  in  the  days  of  the 
Romans,  though  the  principal  place  of  Roman  sepul- 


NORMAN  LONDON.  119 

ture  was  where,  between  Bishopsgate  and  Bethnal 
Green,  the  Hospital  of  St.  Mary  Spital  was  afterwards 
founded,  yet  no  inconsiderable  number  must  have 
found  a  final  resting-place  at  Smithfield,  as  the 
cinerary  urns  and  large  stone  sarcophagi  of  the 
later  Roman  period  discovered  during  excavations 
indicate.  The  latest  of  these  discoveries  was  made 
in  1877,  when  two  Roman  sarcophagi  of  Oxford- 
shire oolite  were  brought  to  light  where  the  library  of 
St.  Bartholomew  now  stands. 

Not  only  did  the  monastic  foundations  of  men 
largely  increase  under  the  beneficent  reign  of  Henry 
I.,  but  nunneries,  the  corresponding  establishments 
for  women,  sprang  up  in  every  direction,  of  which  the 
two  most  important  were  the  Benedictine  Nunnery  of 
St.  Mary  at  Clerkenwell  and  the  Benedictine  Nunnery 
of  St.  John  the  Baptist  at  Halliwell,  near  Shoreditch. 
Nor  was  the  religious  zeal  of  the  women  of  the  period 
lessened  when  the  king's  consort,  Matilda  of  Scotland, 
interested  herself  personally  in  all  manner  of  chari- 
table works  and  religious  foundations.  We  have 
already  seen  that  the  Priory  of  the  Holy  Trinity  at 
Aldgate  owed  its  foundation  to  her  beneficence,  and  it 
was  presumably  to  her  influence  that  it  obtained  the 
valuable  privileges  which  Henry  I.  conferred  upon  it 
in  a  special  charter.  She  did  not  confine  herself,  how- 
ever, to  one  act  of  this  kind,  for  to  her  also  does  the 
hospital  for  lepers  at  St.  Giles  in  the  Fields  owe  its 
foundation. 


120  LONDON. 

During  this  same  reign,  so  auspicious  for  foundations 
of  every  kind,  those  military  monks,  the  Knights  of 
St.  John  and  the  Knights  Templar,  sought  a  home  in 
England,  and  established  themselves  in  London.  The 
first  of  these  great  orders  of  chivalry  had  originated 
in  Jerusalem  in  1048,  and  owed  its  origin  to  the  hos- 
pice of  St.  John  of  Jerusalem,  which  was  founded  in 
that  year  by  some  merchants  of  Amalfi  for  the  recep- 
tion of  pilgrims  from  Europe  who  visited  the  Holy 
Sepulchre,  and  to  the  religious  congregation  of  lay 
brothers  connected  with  the  said  hospice  and  known 
as  the  Brothers  Hospitallers  of  St.  John  the  Baptist 
in  Jerusalem.  The  Turks  having  succeeded,  however, 
the  Saracens  in  Palestine,  the  hospice  was  plundered, 
the  brethren  imprisoned,  and  on  the  conquest  of  Jeru- 
salem by  Godfrey  de  Bouillon,  in  1099,  their  first 
superior,  Gerard,  had  been  found  in  prison.  Released 
from  confinement,  he  had  resumed  his  duties,  and  the 
order  over  which  he  had  presided  had  been  joined  by 
some  of  the  Crusaders,  who  desired  to  devote  them- 
selves to  the  care  of  poor  and  suffering  pilgrims.  By 
Gerard's  advice,  the  brethren  took  the  vow  of  poverty, 
chastity  and  obedience;  and  Pascal  II.,  then  Pope, 
gave  his  official  sanction  to  the  establishment  of  the 
order  in  A.D.  1113.  Gerard  was  succeeded,  in  1120, 
by  a  certain  Ruggiero,  who  was  in  turn  succeeded,  on 
his  death  in  1131,  by  the  famous  Raymond  du  Puy, 
who  drew  up  a  body  of  statutes  for  the  order  based 
on  the  rules  of  St.  Basil  and  St.  Benedict,  partaking 


Inner  Temple  and  Garden 


NOKMAN  LONDON.  121 

somewhat  of  the  severity  of  the  one  and  of  the  greater 
mildness  of  the  other.  To  the  former  obligations  he 
added  those  of  fighting  against  the  infidels  and  pro- 
tecting the  Holy  Sepulchre ;  and  thus  the  order  ceased 
to  be  purely  religious  and  charitable,  and  came  to  be 
at  once  monastic  and  military.  The  example  of  the 
Knights  of  St.  John  soon  led  to  emulation,  and  thus 
there  arose  in  Jerusalem  other  orders  also  monas- 
tic and  military,  with  very  similar  and  only  slightly 
divergent  aims  and  duties.  Amongst  these,  the  most 
conspicuous,  for  a  time  at  least,  was  undoubtedly  that 
of  the  Knights  Templar,  or  Soldiers  of  the  Temple. 
These,  then,  were  the  military  monks  as  they  had 
appropriately  been  called,  who,  during  the  reign  of 
Henry  I.,  sought  admission  into  England  and  founded 
houses  in  the  neighborhood  of  London. 

The  Priory  of  St.  John  of  Jerusalem  had  already 
been  established  as  a  purely  religious  and  charitable 
foundation  in  1100  by  one  Jordan  Briset  and  his  wife 
Muriel,  at  Clerkenwell,  to  the  northwest  of  the  city,  a 
little  way  out  of  Aldersgate,  and  when  the  order  be- 
came one  of  chivalry,  the  Knights  of  St.  John  took 
possession  of  the  place.  The  Priory  of  St.  John  now 
l)eeame  greatly  enlarged  and  beautified,  and  on  the 
suppression  of  the  Knights  Templar  in  1324  was  en- 
dowed with  the  revenues  of  that  illustrious  body. 
These  latter  had  established  themselves  at  Holboru  in 
1118,  also  to  the  northwest  of  the  city,  beyond  New- 
gate, where  they  remained  until  they  finally  removed 


122  LONDON. 

to  the  splendid,  and  as  they  thought  permanent,  home 
which  they  had  erected  for  themselves,  near  the  Fleet, 
and  which  from  them  came  to  be  known  as  the 
Temple. 

That  Henry  I.  was  both  just  and  beneficent  we 
have  had  already  ample  proof ;  it  is  left  but  to  add 
that  his  justice  and  charity  were  only  equalled  by  his 
love  of  the  beautiful  and  his  taste  in  art  and  letters. 
That  this  was  due  greatly  to  the  influence  of  each  of 
his  consorts  in  turn  is  very  probable,  for  we  learn  that 
both  were  women  of  cultured  minds,  and  that  while 
the  poets  hastened  to  the  court  of  Matilda  of  West- 
minster, to  enjoy  there  her  hospitality,  read  her  their 
verses  and  seek  her  patronage,  in  later  years  the  influ- 
ence of  Alice  of  Lou  vain  was  none  the  less  marked 
on  the  art  and  manners  of  the  times. 

Under  Stephen  of  Blois,  who  may  be  said  to  have 
usurped  the  throne  and  who  held  it  for  some  nineteen 
years,  the  whole  structure  of  society  was  again  shaken 
to  its  foundation.  Turbulence  and  anarchy  succeeded 
to  order  and  discipline,  and  the  court  itself  fell  into  a 
condition  analogous  to  that  of  the  rest  of  the  country. 
The  citizens  of  London  had  every  reason  to  regret 
the  alacrity  with  which  they  had  hailed  him  as  king 
on  the  death  of  Henry,  in  detriment  to  the  claims  and 
title  of  Matilda,  his  daughter,  and  her  infant  son, 
Henry  Plantagenet.  London,  however,  kept  her 
promise  to  the  king  of  her  choice,  but  Stephen  failed 
to  keep  his  to  her.  The  annals  of  his  reign  are  a 


NORMAN  LONDON.  123 

terrible  record  of  wars  and  robberies,  and,  as  though 
to  prove  the  old  maxim,  "misfortunes  never  come 
alone,"  the  elements  seemed  also  in  league  against  the 
city,  for  in  1136,  the  year  after  Stephen  had  assumed 
the  reins  of  government,  the  third  of  London's  great 
fires  devastated  a  large  part  of  the  city.  The  fire 
started  near  London  Stone,  adjoining  the  church  of 
St.  Swithin,  in  the  very  heart  of  the  city.  It  spread 
westward  along  the  Watling  Street  as  far  as  St.  Paul's, 
where  it  destroyed  the  shrine  of  St.  Erkenwald ;  then, 
turning  eastward,  it  spread  itself  in  the  direction  of 
London  Bridge,  which  it  completely  consumed,  so 
that  that  great  relic  of  Roman  and  Saxon  London  was 
entirely  destroyed.  A  few  years  later  Stephen,  after 
a  reign  filled  with  vicissitudes  and  military  disasters, 
died.  With  him  the  Norman  line  came  to  an  end, 
and  Henry  Plantagenet  ascended  the  throne. 

In  reviewing  the  Norman  period,  and  its  influence 
on  London,  the  most  striking  thing,  perhaps,  is  the 
immense  growth  and  influence  of  the  ecclesiastical 
establishment,  especially  in  reference  to  the  foundation 
of  monastic  and  other  religious  houses,  and  the  valu- 
able privileges  and  endowments  obtained  by  them — 
privileges  and  endowments  which  came  to  be  even 
more  important  under  the  succeeding  dynasty.  The 
principal  churches  of  Norman  foundation,  not  con- 
nected with  any  of  the  monastic  and  other  religious 
establishments  already  alluded  to,  were  those  of  St. 
Mary  the  Virgin  (Aldermanbury),  and  St.  Helen's, 


124  LONDON. 

usually  called  Great  St.  Helen's.  The  first  of  these 
was  erected  about  1116,  a  little  to  the  north  of  the 
city,  on  what  is  now  the  north  side  of  Love  Lane, 
Cripplegate.  It  suffered  destruction  in  the  great  fire 
of  1666,  and  was,  with  so  many  others,  rebuilt  under 
Sir  Christopher  Wren.  The  second  was,  if  popular 
tradition  be  credited,  founded  in  1145.  It  was  and 
is  now  situated  on  what  has  come  to  be  known  as 
Great  St.  Helen's  Place,  on  the  east  side  of  Bishops- 
gate  Street  Within.  The  church  was  at  first  simply  a 
parish  church,  but,  in  1212,  when,  by  the  munificence 
of  a  certain  William,  son  of  William  the  Goldsmith, 
the  Priory  of  the  Nuns  of  St.  Helen  was  established 
in  the  immediate  neighborhood,  a  new  church  was 
erected,  which  was  connected  with  the  priory  and 
dependent  thereon,  and  which  served  the  double  pur- 
pose of  oratory  for  the  priory  and  the  parish  church. 

Another  Norman  foundation  wras  that  of  St.  Giles, 
just  outside  the  walls,  near  Cripplegate,  erected  as 
early  as  1090,  during  the  reign  of  William  II.  by 
a  certain  Alfune,  afterwards  first  hospitaller  of  St. 
Bartholomew's  Hospital.  The  church,  however,  hav- 
ing fallen  into  great  disrepair,  was  rebuilt  late  in  the 
fourteenth  century.  This  second  edifice  was  much 
injured  by  the  fire  of  1545,  and  the  church  had  there- 
fore to  be  a  third  time  reconstructed.  Other  founda- 
tions, though  these  were  connected  with  hospitals,  were 
St.  Alphage,  by  London  Wall,  and  St.  Katherine,  by 
the  Tower.  The  former  of  these  was  connected  with 


NORMAN  LONDON.  125 

the  priory  and  hospital  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin, 
founded  by  one  William  Elsyng,  "  for  the  sustentation 
of  one  hundred  blind  men."  Spital  (to  whom  we 
owe  the  term  of  Spitalfields)  was  the  first  prior.  The 
original  St.  Alphage,  which  was  situated  near  Alders- 
gate,  was  in  existence  as  early  as  1068.  In  the  reign 
of  Henry  VIII.  it  had  come  to  be  in  a  ruinous  con- 
dition, and  the  parishioners  petitioned  to  be  allowed 
to  rebuild  it.  This  was  not  granted,  but  the  king  let 
them  have  the  chapel  of  St.  Mary  Elsyng  for  the 
sum  of  one  hundred  pounds  a  year.  The  old  church 
was  then  pulled  down,  and  some  of  the  materials 
sold,  while  the  remainder  were  used  to  repair  the 
chapel. 

The  foundation  of  St.  Katherine  by  the  Tower 
took  place  in  1148.  This  free  chapel  was  connected 
with  a  royal  hospital  and  college,  all  three  of  which 
had  been  founded  by  Matilda  of  Boulogne,  consort 
of  Stephen  I.  It  was  greatly  enlarged  in  1273,  by 
Eleanor  of  Castile,  consort  of  Edward  I.,  and  again 
by  Philippa  of  Hainault,  consort  of  Edward  III. 
The  hospital  and  college,  which  had  been  placed  per- 
petually under  the  patronage  of  the  royal  consorts  of 
England,  suffered  the  fate  of  the  other  religious 
houses  under  Henry  VIII.,  but  was  in  a  measure 
re-established  by  Elizabeth.  The  church  or  chapel, 
of  decorated  Gothic,  stood  on  the  east  side  of  what 
was  then  called  St.  Katherine's  Court,  close  to  the 
Thames,  a  little  below  the  Irongatc  of  the  Tower, 


126  LONDON. 

and  therefore  without  the  city  walls.  It  was  a  fine 
building,  about  sixty-nine  feet  in  length  and  sixty  feet 
in  width,  with  a  choir  sixty-three  feet  in  length  and 
twenty-three  feet  wide,  divided  by  a  handsome  Gothic 
screen.  The  construction  of  St.  Katherine's  docks 
compelled  its  removal,  and  services  were  held  in  the 
church  for  the  last  time  on  October  30,  1823. 

That  society  during  the  Norman  period  was  in  a 
very  crude  state,  and  remained  so  under  the  Planta- 
genets,  there  is  every  evidence  to  prove ;  yet,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  both  of  the  consorts  of  Henry  I. 
were  women  of  culture  and  refinement,  who  attracted 
to  their  court  many  men  of  wit  and  learning,  and 
while  the  Saxon  period  may  truthfully  be  said  to 
have  produced  only  two  great  names  in  literary  an- 
nals— the  venerable  Bede  and  the  famous  Csedmon — to 
the  Norman  period  we  owe  quite  a  number  of  illus- 
trious names.  It  was  during  the  reign  of  Henry  I. 
that  Geoffrey  of  Monmouth  produced  his  wonderful 
"  Historye  "  of  Britain,  to  which  we  owe  an  account, 
interesting  though  not  veracious,  of  pre-Roman  Britain, 
and  which  was  embellished  also  by  marvellous  tales 
concerning  Arthur  and  the  equally  celebrated  Knights 
of  the  Round  Table.  It  was  almost  simultaneously 
with  this  that  the  so-called  Chronicle  of  Turpin  made 
its  first  appearance,  and  also  the  Alexandrian  ro- 
mances by  the  pretended  Dares  Phrygius  and  Dictys 
Cretensis,  which  were  introduced  into  England  by  re- 
turning Crusaders.  Thus  the  reign  of  Henry  I.  and 


NORMAN  LONDON.  127 

that  of  his  successor  saw  the  birth,  as  it  were,  of  ro- 
mantic literature,  which  for  centuries  aroused  enthu- 
siasm throughout  Europe ;  and  not  only  were  poets 
and  historians  welcomed  at  court,  but  under  Matilda 
of  Scotland,  Alice  of  Louvain,  and  the  illustrious  con- 
sort of  Stephen  I.,  Matilda  of  Boulogne,  the  very 
foundations  were  laid  of  that  elegant  structure  called 
modern  society. 


128  LONDON. 


CHAPTER    V. 

LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS. 

Accession  of  Henry  II. — The  New  Dynasty — Thomas  &  Becket — 
Completion  of  London  Bridge— The  Building  of  the  Temple — 
The  Church  of  St.  John — Richard  I.  and  the  Crusades — Lep- 
rosy in  London — The  Founding  of  St.  James'  Hospital — King 
John— The  Great  Charter— The  Craft-Guilds— The  Weavers' 
Company— Guild  Hall— The  First  Mayor  of  London— Serlo  le 
Mercer— Accession  of  Henry— Building  of  the  Savoy— Devel- 
opment of  the  Ecclesiastical  Establishments  —  Westminster 
Abbey — The  Dominicans  in  London — Blackfriars  in  Castle 
Baynard— Arrival  of  the  Franciscans — Greyfriars  at  Newgate 
— The  Carthusians  in  Chancery  Lane — Arrival  of  the  Car- 
melites— Whitefriars — The  Old  and  the  New  Jewries — Eag 
Fair — Simon  de  Montford — The  Rise  of  the  Companies — They 
Obtain  Charters  from  Walter  Harvey,  Mayor— Eleanor  of  Cas- 
tile— Charing  Cross— Marriage  of  Edward  I.  and  Margaret  of 
France — Civic  Pageants — Tilts  and  Tournaments — The  King 
Grants  Charters  to  the  Companies — Their  Rules  and  Regula- 
tions—The Charter  of  Maces — The  Lord  Mayor  of  London — 
The  Wards— The  Wards  Without— The  Companies  Erect  their 
own  Halls— The  Power  of  the  Church— The  Bishop  of  London 
—The  New  St.  Paul's— The  Parishes— The  Parishes  Without— 
The  Churches  —  Extant  Plantagenet  Churches  — Great  St. 
Helen's— St.  Giles  (Cripplegate)— Arrival  of  the  Cistercians- 
East  Minster — Foundation  of  the  Charter  House — Dissolution 
of  the  Knights  Templar  —  The  Inns  of  Court  —  The  Inner, 
Middle  and  Outer  Temple— Lincoln's  Inn— Gray's  Inn — Their 
Rules  and  Regulations— City  Improvements— Street  Architec- 
ture in  Plantagenet  Times — Condition  of  the  Cheap — The 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.       129 

Development  of  Social  Life — The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
at  Lambeth  Palace — The  Archbishop  of  York  at  Whitehall — 
Rochester  House — Durham  House — Ely  House— Civic  Enter- 
taining— Amusements  of  the  Citizens — The  Beginnings  of  the 
Tavern  as  an  Institution — The  Albion  Tavern  at  Aldersgate — 
The  Horn  Tavern  at  the  Fleet— The  Cock  Tavern— West- 
minster— The  White  Hart,  Southwark — The  Tabard  and  the 
Canterbury  Pilgrims — Letters  in  the  Plantagenet  Days. 

WHEN  Henry  Plantagenet  ascended  the  throne, 
under  the  name  of  Henry  II.,  he  came  into  those 
rights  of  which,  it  was  claimed  by  his  adherents,  he 
had  long  been  unjustly  deprived;  for,  when  dying, 
Henry  I.,  in  1135,  leaving  no  male  issue,  had  be- 
queathed the  crown  to  his  daughter  Matilda,  widow 
of  Henry  IV.,  Emperor  of  Germany,  whom  he  had 
caused  to  marry  in  second  nuptials  Geoffrey  Plau- 
tagenet,  Earl  of  Anjou,  and  thus  Henry  became  the 
rightful  claimant  to  the  throne,  he  being  her  son  by 
her  second  husband.  The  seizure  of  the  crown  by  the 
late  king's  nephew,  Stephen,  son  of  his  sister  Adela, 
wife  of  Stephen,  Earl  of  Blois,  was — though  supported 
by  some  of  the  barons,  who  disliked  the  idea  of  a 
woman,  in  the  person  of  Matilda,  ascending  the 
throne — held  to  be  illegal,  as  contrary  both  to  Anglo- 
Saxon  and  Norman  custom  and  tradition.  Whatever 
may  have  been  the  abstract  merits  of  the  case,  it  cer- 
tainly ended  in  a  desperate  struggle,  which  was  only 
terminated  by  the  truce  of  Wallingford  in  1153. 
During  all  this  time  London  had  been  frequently  the 
scene  of  the  strife,  and  the  consequences  upon  the 
VOL.  I.— 9 


130  LONDON. 

city  had  been  of  a  very  demoralizing  nature.  Law 
and  order,  justice  and  authority,  were  constantly  set 
at  naught  by  the  ever-varying  stages  of  the  game. 

The  Londoners  were  literally  torn  from  one  side  to 
the  other  in  the  struggle.  Matilda,  when  at  one 
time  she  became  mistress  of  the  situation,  sought  to 
punish  them  for  their  former  allegiance  to  Stephen  by 
depriving  them  of  all  their  liberties.  She  rescinded 
the  grants  that  her  father  and  grandfather  had  made 
to  the  city,  and  even  went  so  far  as  to  give  Middlesex 
to  the  Earl  of  Essex  to  farm,  granting  him  the  Tower 
of  London  as  his  castle,  appointing  him  at  the  same 
time  to  the  sheriffship  of  London,  as  well  as  of  Mid- 
dlesex, and  to  the  office  of  justieiar;  so  that  no  person 
could  hold  any  pleas  in  either  city  or  county  without 
his  sanction.  By  this  monstrous  act  she  did  what  the 
Londoners  had  always  feared  would  occur — that  is, 
she  destroyed  at  one  blow  all  their  privileges,  reducing 
them  to  the  position  of  a  "demesne"  with  an  over- 
lord entitled  to  plunder  and  oppress  at  will.  As  may 
be  supposed,  the  citizens  were  immediately  aroused, 
and  a  deputation  was  sent  to  "Winchester,  where  the 
estates  of  the  realm  had  been  assembled  to  recognize 
Matilda  as  Queen  of  England.  Here  they  clamored 
loudly  for  the  release  of  Stephen,  then  in  prison ;  for 
even  the  evils  of  his  reign  were  as  naught  to  the  then 
existing  state  of  things.  Notwithstanding  the  repre- 
sentations made  to  her  at  St.  Albans  by  a  special 
deputation  sent  to  her  by  her  adherents  within  the 


Coronation  Chair,  Westminster  Abbey 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   131 

city,  she  determined  upon  proceeding  to  the  capital ; 
and  there,  while  she  succeeded  in  compelling  a  respect- 
ful reception,  the  citizens  hoping  for  a  repeal  of  the 
offensive  enactments,  she  behaved  in  such  a  manner, 
and  so  disdained  their  petitions,  as  to  antagonize  even 
her  best  friends,  and  was  finally  compelled  to  retire. 
With  the  accession  of  Henry  II.,  London's  day  of 
triumph  came.  Henry,  however,  proved  himself  quite 
equal  to  the  idea  entertained  of  his  abilities,  and  his 
first  acts  augured  a  return  of  that  justice  and  tran- 
quillity of  which  the  city,  and,  in  fact,  the  entire  king- 
dom, had  for  so  very  long  been  deprived.  He  at  once 
dismissed  the  mercenaries,  who  had  been  brought  to- 
gether to  protect  their  interests  by  his  predecessors, 
and  revoked  all  unjust  measures  made  by  Stephen, 
and  those  which  had  been  attempted  by  his  mother, 
or,  as  her  partisans  claim,  forced  upon  her  by  the 
stress  of  circumstances.  He  reformed  the  coin,  and 
was  both  stern  and  just  in  his  suppression  of  robbery 
and  violence;  and  again  granted  to  London  and  its 
citizens  those  liberties  and  privileges  of  which  they 
had  been  deprived  during  the  preceding  reign.  Never, 
in  fact,  did  reign  open  more  auspiciously.  With  his 
accession,  a  new  life,  as  well  as  a  new  dynasty,  had  its 
beginning.  It  was  claimed  for  London  by  a  contem- 
porary writer  that  it  possessed  at  this  time  "the  most 
wholesome  of  climates,  the  most  fortunate  situation, 
the  strongest  of  fortresses,  the  most  chaste  of  matrons, 
the  most  honorable,  just  and  pious  of  citizens,  and 


132  LONDON. 

among  them  the  greatest  number  of  then  living  illus- 
trious names." 

In  fact,  even  with  allowance  for  the  buoyancy  of 
this  exordium,  everything  seemed  to  prognosticate,  as 
it  were,  the  great  movements  of  the  thirteenth  century, 
and  the  very  buoyancy  thus  alluded  to  would  have 
seemed  to  have  indicated  a  certain  newness  and  fresh- 
ness of  surrounding.  And  indeed  the  city,  though 
still  encircled  by  its  ancient  walls,  was,  in  truth,  in  a 
large  measure  new,  for  the  destruction  caused  by  the 
fire  of  1136  had  compelled  vast  works  of  reconstruc- 
tion. The  Londoners,  feeling  more  sure  of  their  po- 
sition and  secure  in  their  rights  and  privileges,  gave 
themselves  up  to  peaceful  occupations  of  commerce 
and  the  arts  of  trade.  They  had  weathered  the  storm, 
and  come  out  victorious  from  under  the  heel  of  op- 
pression. Everysvhere  and  in  everything  there  seemed 
to  sound  the  bugle-note  of  a  new  life.  Bishop  Fitz- 
meal  was  arduously  at  work  at  a  codification  of  the 
laws ;  Ralph  de  Diss  was  engaged  in  his  deanery  on 
his  epitome  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle,  and  the 
curate  of  Colechurch,  a  certain  Peter,  who  had  in 
1176  been  commissioned  by  Henry  to  undertake  the 
task,  was  completing  his  plans  for  the  new  bridge 
which  was  to  immortalize  him.  London  Bridge 
had,  through  floods  and  fires,  suffered  so  severely 
that  it  was  held  to  be  decidedly  unsafe.  The  king, 
therefore,  determined  that,  instead  of  constantly  re- 
curring repairs,  a  completely  new  bridge  should  be 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   133 

erected.  Thus  did  the  last  vestige  of  the  old  Roman 
and  Saxon  bridge,  which  had  served  such  useful  pur- 
pose, disappear,  and  a  stone  structure  span  the  river 
instead. 

Here  must  we  pause  to  give  a  passing  tribute  to  a 
remarkable  man.  Simultaneously  almost  with  the 
accession  of  Henry  II.,  there  arose  in  England  a 
man,  who  while  he  cannot  perhaps  be  said  to  belong 
properly  speaking  to  the  history  of  England's  greatest 
city,  yet  from  the  high  position  hi  both  Church  and 
State  which  he  attained,  and  the  great  influence  which 
he  exercised  over  the  king  and  the  greatest  minds  of 
his  time,  deserves  special  mention.  This  man  was 
Thomas  &  Becket,  Archbishop,  Chancellor  and  mar- 
tyr. The  son  of  a  London  merchant,  he  showed  at 
an  early  age  a  rare  taste  and  aptitude  for  literary  and 
philosophical  pursuits.  Having  interested  Theobald, 
then  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  he  was  sent  to  study 
at  Oxford  and  at  Bologna.  On  his  return  from  Italy, 
he  entered  the  church,  and  rose  rapidly  to  honors  and 
distinction.  In  1158,  four  years  after  his  accession, 
he  was  made  Chancellor  by  Henry  II.,  and  the  fol- 
lowing year  accompanied  the  king  on  his  journey  to 
France,  with  a  large  and  splendid  retinue.  Three 
years  later,  in  1162,  he  became  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury. His  resignation  from  the  office  of  Chancellor, 
which  occurred  shortly  afterwards,  his  controversy 
with  the  king  concerning  the  limits  of  ecclesiastical 
and  civil  authority,  his  refusal  to  sign  the  "  Constitu- 


134  LONDON. 

tions  of  Clarendon,"  his  suspension  from  his  high 
office,  his  flight  to  France,  his  subsequent  reconcilia- 
tion with  Henry  II.,  and  finally  his  assassination  at 
Canterbury,  are  all  well-known  pages  in  his  history. 
In  1173  his  canonization  followed,  and  some  fifty 
years  later  his  remains  were  translated  to  a  splendid 
shrine,  which  came  to  be  loaded  with  rich  offerings 
and  to  attract  many  pilgrims. 

The  new  London  Bridge  in  the  meantime  had  been 
nearing  its  completion,  and  was  finally  declared  fin- 
ished in  1209.  A  chapel  had  already  (in  1190)  been 
erected  in  memory  of  St.  Thomas  a  Becket  on  the 
spot  where  the  house  in  which  he  was  born  had  stood 
in  Cheapside,  and  in  conjunction  with  which  a  hospital 
had  been  founded,  under  the  name  of  St.  Thomas  of 
Aeon,  by  the  deceased's  sister,  Agnes  a  Becket.  The 
name  of  Aeon  had  been  appended  because  of  the  pop- 
ular belief  that  Aeon,  or  Acre,  in  Syria,  had  been 
captured  by  the  Crusaders  through  his  miraculous 
interposition.  It  was  now  thought  suitable  that  a 
chapel  to  his  memory  should  adorn  the  new  bridge, 
and  one  was  accordingly  erected  thereon.  A  row  of 
houses  sprang  up  on  either  side,  so  that  the  bridge 
was  thus  made  to  resemble  a  continuous  street.  At 
both  extremities  fortified  gates  gave  access  to  the  thor- 
oughfare, and  on  the  pinnacles  of  these  it  became 
customary  to  expose  the  heads  of  traitors.  Nor  were 
the  houses,  so  romantically  situated  over  the  water's 
edge,  without  histories  equally  romantic.  In  one  of 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.       135 

these  there  lived,  in  the  days  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
Sir  John  Hewitt,  then  Lord  Mayor;  and,  according 
to  a  much-believed  tradition,  his  daughter  one  day,  in 
leaning  out  of  the  window,  fell  into  the  river,  from 
which  she  was  rescued  by  a  gallant  youth,  one  Edward 
Osborne,  apprentice  to  her  father,  who  subsequently 
won  and  wed  her  whom  he  had  rescued,  and  became 
the  founder  of  the  ducal  house  of  Leeds. 

The  year  1170  saw  the  beginning  of  a  construc- 
tion perhaps  equally  celebrated  as  London  Bridge — 
that  vast  pile  of  buildings  which  has  in  its  aggregate 
come  to  be  designated  as  the  Temple.  The  Knights 
Templar  had,  as  we  hav«  seen,  established  themselves 
in  Holborn,  beyond  Newgate,  during  a  preceding  reign. 
They  soon,  however,  found  their  temporary  quarters 
both  unpleasant  and  overcrowded,  and  they  deter- 
mined, therefore,  to  have  a  place  of  abode  and  wor- 
ship suitable  to  their  exalted  station  and  distinguished 
aims.  Thus  commenced  the  erection  of  the  Temple. 
The  site  selected  was  the  river  edge,  between  the  city 
and  Westminster,  and  a  little  to  the  west  of  the  Fleet. 
Completed  in  1184,  the  Knights  Templar  removed 
thither,  and  four  years  later  we  find  them  thoroughly 
at  home  and  established  in  their  new  quarters.  This 
great  pile  of  buildings  was  divided  into  a  so-called 
Inner,  Middle  and  Outer  Temple,  in  connection,  it 
has  been  held,  with  their  relative  position  in  reference 
to  the  city — the  Inner  Temple  being  that  which  lay 
furthest  to  the  east,  and  therefore  the  nearest  to  the 


136  LONDON. 

protection  afforded  by  the  city  walls,  while  the  Outer 
Temple  was  that  which  was  nearest  to  Westminster,  and 
therefore  the  furthest  from  the  city.  The  most  im- 
portant buildings  of  the  large  aggregation  of  cloisters, 
chambers,  armories,  public  halls  and  oratories  was,  as 
it  remains  to-day,  the  church  of  the  Temple,  which 
was  the  principal  place  of  worship  of  the  knights  and 
their  attendants,  and  is  situated  within  the  Inner 
Temple.  It  consists  of  two  parts — the  Round  Church 
and  the  Choir. 

The  former,  distinctly  Norman  in  character,  dates 
from  1185,  as  is  testified  to  by  an  inscription  in  Saxon 
characters,  formerly  on  the  stonework  over  the  little 
door  next  to  the  cloisters.  It  was  dedicated  to  Herac- 
lius,  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem.  The  Choir,  on  the  other 
hand,  which  is  pure  Early  English,  was  not  completed 
until  1240.  On  the  suppression  of  the  Order  of  the 
Templars  under  Edward  II.,  in  1313,  and  when  the 
Temple  itself  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  Benchers 
of  the  two  societies  of  the  Inner  and  Middle  Temple, 
the  church  became  the  place  of  worship  of  these  latter 
and  of  the  students  of  the  Common  Law,  and  has  so 
remained.  The  old  edifice,  one  of  the  most  interesting 
and  noteworthy  in  London,  sustained  some  damage  by 
fire  and  other  accidents  at  different  times.  It  was,  in 
part,  rebuilt  in  the  latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, and  the  whole  structure  put  into  thorough  repair 
in  1839-'42,  in  perfect  twelfth  and  thirteenth  century 
taste.  The  monuments  were  not  all  permitted  to  re- 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   137 

main  where  they  were  originally  erected,  but  in  some 
instances  were  replaced  to  conform  with  architectural 
canons.  Many  have  been  removed  to  the  triforium. 
The  principal  ones  are  of  William,  Earl  of  Pembroke, 
Earl  Marshal  and  Lord  Protector  during  the  minority 
of  Henry  III.  (died  1119),  and  a  group  of  monu- 
mental effigies  of  Knights  Templar,  the  names  of 
which  are  uncertain.  There  are  also  monuments  to 
the  learned  Selclen  and  Plowden,  the  jurists,  Richard 
Martin,  to  whom  Jonson  dedicates  his  Poetaster, 
James  Howell,  the  letter-writer,  and  Edmund  Gibbon. 
Lord  Chancellor  Thurlow  is  buried  under  the  south 
aisle,  while  Oliver  Goldsmith  lies  in  the  burial 
ground,  east  of  the  choir,  without  the  church  itself. 

With  the  accession  of  Richard  I.,  surnamed  the 
Lion  Heart  (Cceur  de  Lion),  who  succeeded  to  his 
father  without  opposition,  the  chief  magistrate  of 
London  assumed  a  new  title,  that  of  mayor.  Henry 
Fitz-Aylwyu,  or  Fitz-Eylwyn,  who  was  the  first  to 
enjoy  this  title,  was  a  man  remarkable  for  his  recti- 
tude and  justice.  Pie  has  wrongly  been  held  respon- 
sible, however,  for  the  riots  which  occurred  at  Rich- 
ard's coronation,  and  the  massacre  of  the  Jews,  which 
followed ;  but  as  the  coronation  of  the  king  occurred 
on  September  3,  1189,  the  massacre  taking  place  the 
day  following,  and  as  the  new  sheriffs,  Henry  of 
Cornhill  and  Richard  Fitz  Reyner,  only  took  their 
oaths  on  Michaelmas  Day,  September  29,  everything 
would  go  towards  proving  that  the  new  mayor, 


138  LONDON. 

unless,  as  is  possible,  he  first  acted  in  behalf  of  his 
fellow-citizens  as  butler  at  the  coronation  banquet, 
only  came  into  office  on  the  November  9  following. 

Richard  is  usually  known  to  fame  as  the  hero  of 
the  Third  Crusade,  the  champion  of  the  oppressed  in 
Palestine ;  but  whatever  he  may  have  accomplished 
in  the  way  of  permanently  benefitting  Christians  in 
the  East — and  it  is  doubtful  if  he  was  particularly 
successful  in  this  direction — for  his  own  country  he  did 
but  little ;  and  whatever  may  have  been  his  martial 
qualities,  we  find  but  small  record  of  his  generosity 
or  justice  in  his  dealing  with  London  and  its  citizens. 
The  new  life  which  had  just  sprung  up  was  almost 
crushed  by  his  exactions,  and  all  breathed  more  freely 
when  he  had  departed  on  his  travels,  leaving  the  ad- 
ministration of  his  kingdom  to  his  Chancellor,  Long- 
champs,  Bishop  of  Ely,  who  immediately  took  up  his 
residence  in  the  Tower.  The  conduct  of  this  prelate 
was  not,  however,  such  as  to  appease  the  anxiety  of 
the  citizens.  He  immediately  commenced  great  works 
of  defence,  encroaching  on  the  city  boundaries  there- 
by, and  causing  great  alarm  and  offence  to  the  citizens 
by  so  doing.  But  he  still  further  enraged  the  public 
when  he  caused  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  whom  the 
king  had  designated  as  his  co-regent,  to  be  seized  and 
imprisoned,  and  insulted  Geoffrey,  Archbishop  of 
York.  These  acts  brought  the  indignation  of  the 
nation  to  a  climax,  and  John,  the  king's  youngest 
brother,  seeing  therein  a  means  of  furthering  his  own 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANT  AGE  NETS.       139 

ambitions,  lost  no  time  in  summoning  a  court  about 
him,  at  the  chapter  house  of  St.  Paul's,  to  consider  the 
deposition  of  the  regent.  A  letter  from  Richard,  then 
at  Messina,  and  which  defined  and  limited  the  powers 
of  the  regent,  was  read  aloud,  and  a  deputation  sent 
to  the  Tower  to  apprise  Longchamps  of  the  decision 
whereby  he  was  removed.  He  immediately  came  to 
terms,  and  was  permitted,  in  return,  to  cross  the  river 
to  Bermondsey,  from  which  place  he  escaped  to  the 
continent. 

The  adventures  of  Richard,  his  deeds  of  valor,  the 
success  of  his  arms  against  Saladin,  his  subsequent 
misfortunes,  and  his  detention  at  the  hands  of  Henry 
IV.,  Emperor  of  Germany,  on  the  return  journey,  be- 
long rather  to  the  general  history  of  his  reign  than 
to  the  chronicle  of  London  events.  Notwithstanding 
his  long  absence,  he  was  warmly  welcomed,  however, 
on  his  return,  and  granted  to  the  citizens  a  renewal 
of  the  charter  of  Henry  II.,  a  favor  for  which  they 
doubtless  paid  heavily.  The  city  was  also  burdened 
to  pay  a  share  of  the  king's  ransom,  and  to  defray 
the  expenses  of  a  second  coronation,  which  took  place 
on  his  return.  A  second  time  the  citizens  assembled 
to  the  ringing  of  the  burghmote  bell  in  the  church- 
yard of  St.  Paul's,  but  the  meeting  did  not  avail,  and 
a  riot  ensuing,  a  number  of  the  citizens  were  slain. 
Their  leader,  a  certain  William  Longbeard,  whose  real 
name  was  Fitz-Osbert,  was  apprehended  and  paid 
with  his  life  the  penalty  of  his  leadership.  In  1198 


140  LONDON. 

Richard  granted  a  second  charter,  this  one  relating 
to  the  Thames  Conservancy.  A  year  later  he  died  in 
Normandy  of  a  wound  received  at  the  siege  of  the 
castle  of  Chaluz.  Arthur,  Duke  of  Brittany,  the 
son  and  heir  of  his  next  brother  Geoffrey,  being  a 
minor,  the  crown  of  England  was  assumed  by  Rich- 
ard's youngest  brother,  John. 

The  reign  of  Richard,  important  though  it  may  be 
to  the  historian  of  the  Crusades,  is  but  of  slight  im- 
portance in  respect  to  its  influence  on  the  capital  of 
England.  The  increased  traffic  with  the  East,  brought 
about  by  the  Crusades,  and  the  return  of  the  first 
knights  from  their  chivalric  venture,  had,  however, 
been  largely  instrumental  in  the  importation  and 
introduction  into  England  of  a  variety  of  Oriental 
scourges,  of  which,  perhaps,  not  the  least  alarming 
was  that  dread  disease,  the  leprosy.  In  fact,  so 
largely  had  the  number  of  victims  of  this  awful  pes- 
tilence increased  in  London  that  it  was  held  advisable, 
and  indeed  found  necessary,  as  early  as  the  first  year 
of  Richard's  reign,  to  establish  a  hospital  in  which 
these  unfortunates  could  find  a  shelter,  and,  while 
isolated  from  the  rest  of  the  community,  receive 
proper  care,  treatment  and  attention.  Thus,  in  the 
year  1190,  was  the  Hospital  of  St.  James  for  Lepers 
founded,  in  what  was  then  a  more  or  less  isolated 
locality,  to  the  west  of  the  city  and  to  the  north  of 
Westminster.  This  foundation  was  some  centuries 
later  transformed  into  a  royal  residence  by  Henry 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   141 

VIII.,  and  became  the  present  St.  James'  Palace,  in 
which  his  daughter  Mary  held  her  court  and  finally 
expired,  and  one  portion  of  which,  denominated  York 
House,  the  present  Duke  and  Duchess  of  Cornwall 
and  York  made  until  recently  their  London  residence. 
Under  John  the  struggle  for  liberty  continued  both 
in  London  and  throughout  the  kingdom.  Hardly 
was  he  seated  on  the  throne,  than  "  twenty  of  the  more 
discreet  men "  were  sworn  together  by  the  mayor  to 
take  counsel  on  behalf  of  the  city.  That  this  measure 
was  productive  of  some  results  is  evidenced  by  the 
granting  of  no  less  than  five  charters  in  years  imme- 
diately following,  and  though  of  these  some  were 
unimportant  and  obtained  only  on  heavy  payments, 
yet  by  them  certain  privileges  and  advantages  were 
derived.  But  the  struggle  was  not  altogether  between 
the  king  and  citizens.  A  great  rivalry  existed  be- 
tween the  wealthier  burgesses  and  the  ordinary  crafts- 
men, and  the  prudhommes  were  at  every  election 
arrayed  against  the  latter.  The  wards  were  in  the 
hands  of  the  landowners,  and  the  aldermen  themselves 
were  very  much  in  the  position  of  lords  of  manors. 
Their  office,  originally  elective  and  for  a  specified 
term,  had  become  indeterminate  in  its  length  of  dura- 
tion, and,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  practically 
hereditary.  These  so-called  "barons  of  the  city" 
formed,  in  truth,  an  oligarchy,  and  practically  con- 
trolled the  whole  machinery  of  civic  government, 
the  merchant  guild,  the  revenues  of  the  city  and  the 


]42  LONDON. 

trade  regulations.  It  was  to  fight  this  tyranny,  this 
species  of  trust,  that  the  craft  guilds  were  at  first 
organized.  The  craftsmen  saw  that,  unless  all  of  the 
same  craft  were  joined  together,  their  efforts  at  stem- 
ming the  tide  of  oppression  were  worse  than  useless. 
That  guildship  was  of  very  great  antiquity  in 
London,  and  indeed  in  all  the  cities  of  England,  we 
have  historic  evidence.  We  have  already  seen  that 
a  "fritiigild"  had  come  into  existence  as  early  as  the 
days  of  JEthelstan,  and  the  foundation  of  the 
Knighten-Guild,  or  Young  Men's  Guild  of  London, 
is  attributed  to  Edgar.  This  guild,  which  obtained 
a  charter  from  Edward  the  Confessor,  was  subse- 
quently honored  also  by  recognition  by  Henry  I.  At 
first  the  guilds  were  merely  for  the  purposes  of  mutual 
help  and  encouragement  among  the  members  of  the 
same  craft.  They  were,  in  fact,  originally  founded  to 
enable  their  members  to  comply  most  conveniently 
with  the  exactions  of  the  frankpledge,  which  required 
of  every  freedman  of  fourteen  years  of  age  to  find 
sureties  for  his  good  behavior.  The  price  of  life  and 
limb  was  paid  by  the  family  or  house  of  the  wrong- 
doer to  the  family  or  house  of  the  man  wronged — the 
first  effort,  it  may  be  said,  of  the  then  dawning  civil- 
ization to  make  clear  to  all  that  a  wrong  to  one  man 
was  a  wrong  to  the  community.  As  the  fine  or 
"bloodwitte"  was  heavy,  ten  families  combined  to- 
gether and  formed  themselves  into  a  guild,  all  being 
equally  responsible  for  an  offence  committed  by  any 


LONDON  UN  DEE  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   143 

member  of  the  guild,  though  they  had  in  return  the 
privilege  of  acting  as  compurgators,  who  investigated 
the  case,  and  by  their  attestations  under  oath  in  regard 
to  the  merits  of  the  case  were  not  infrequently  of 
much  influence  in  deciding  the  guilt  or  innocence  of 
the  accused.  The  members  of  each  guild  met  once  a 
month  at  dinner,  partly  for  social  purposes  and  to 
discuss  business,  partly  to  keep  a  watchful  eye  on  one 
another;  and  by  a  natural  process  of  evolution  these 
"JrUhgHda"  very  soon  developed  into  trade  guilds, 
the  members  of  which  bound  themselves  not  only  to 
encourage  trade  mutually  in  times  of  prosperity,  but 
also  to  assist  the  members  in  times  of  distress,  to  help 
them  over  embarrassments  incurred  by  illness,  to  bury 
the  indigent  members,  and  to  pay  for  masses  for  the 
repose  of  the  souls  of  deceased  brethren. 

These  guilds  were  of  three  kinds — religious,  or 
purely  social,  mercantile,  and  lastly  those  of  handi- 
craftsmen. The  latter  had  been  founded  really  in 
self-defence,  for  the  traders  having  grown  powerful 
and  somewhat  tyrannical,  the  craftsmen  were,  as  we 
have  seen,  actually  driven,  in  their  desperate  efforts 
to  obtain  justice  and  their  share  of  the  city's  govern- 
ment, to  form  craft  guilds,  as  representing  the  com- 
monalty, as  opposed  to  the  mercantile  guilds,  which 
represented  the  city  aristocracy,  or  so-called  "city 
barons."  It  was  the  same  struggle,  under  different 
name,  as  that  which  is  to-day  still  going  on  between 
trusts  and  labor  unions.  The  guilds  of  handicrafts- 


144  LONDON. 

men  had  come  to  be  eighteen  in  number.  Their 
senior  officer  often  bore  the  title  of  alderman,  but 
this  title  had  no  connection  with  that  of  the  municipal 
officer  of  that  name.  United  though  they  might  be 
in  all  things  that  bore  on  their  fight  against  the 
mercantile  guilds  and  the  city  magnates,  they  were 
not,  however,  always  united  among  themselves.  Thus 
the  Goldsmiths  would  fall  out  with  the  Tailors,  and 
the  Tanners  with  the  Cloth  Merchants.  The  Weav- 
ers, on  the  other  hand,  because  of  their  greater  an- 
tiquity— an  antiquity  disputed  only  by  the  Saddlers — 
a  guild  of  unquestioned  Saxon  origin,  superior  wealth 
and  more  perfect  organization,  excited  the  envy  of 
the  other  guilds,  and  so  the  internecine  war  was  con- 
tinued. These  latter  (the  Weavers)  had  succeeded 
in  obtaining  formal  recognition  from  the  crown,  and 
as  early  as  1130  they  had  received  a  charter  from 
Henry  I.,  while  a  second  or  confirmatory  charter  was 
accorded  them  by  Henry  II.  This  interesting  docu- 
ment, which  bears  the  date  of  1154,  is  rendered  even 
more  so,  perhaps,  by  the  fact  that  it  bears  the  seal 
of  Thomas  a  Becket.  Later  they  obtained  from 
Edward  I.  a  charter  so  generous  in  its  liberties  that 
they  assumed  the  right  of  almost  independent  self- 
government — a  right  which  the  municipal  authorities 
could  not  possibly  recognize,  and  a  verdict  against 
them  and  their  pretensions  was  obtained  in  the  fol- 
lowing reign.  It  is  probably  in  consequence  of  this 
that  the  Weavers'  Guild  came  to  be  divided  into  that 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.       145 

of  the  Woollen  Drapers,  the  Tailors,  the  Linen  Ar- 
morers and  others  of  the  trade.  Of  such  separate 
existence  there  is,  however,  no  evidence  before  1299, 
when  the  record  of  the  Tailors'  Company,  which  be- 
came that  of  the  Merchant  Tailors,  commences. 

The  other  guilds  wishing  now,  in  conformity  to  the 
example  of  the  Weavers,  to  secure  legally  the  privi- 
leges which  they  had  acquired  by  prescription,  and 
also  to  possess  a  legally  recognized  corporate  exist- 
ence, sought,  by  application  to  the  crown,  to  ob- 
tain charters  of  incorporation,  with  the  accompanying 
corporate  rights.  It  cannot  be  said  that  they  met 
with  any  very  decided  or  immediate  success.  The 
royal  executive  was  extremely  reluctant  to  place  any 
such  instrument  of  power  in  the  hands  of  any  of  the 
guilds;  and  no  other  charter  was  actually  granted 
until  the  Goldsmiths,  Skinners  and  Merchant  Tailors 
obtained  theirs  in  1327  from  Edward  III.  Indeed, 
their  efforts  to  secure  legal  recognition  had  a  result 
quite  the  contrary  to  that  which  they  anticipated  and 
hoped  for.  The  influence  of  the  mercantile  party,  or 
"city  barons,"  did  much  to  thwart  their  efforts,  and 
instead  of  a  legal  recognition  of  corporate  rights,  they 
not  only  did  not  secure  charters,  but  were  actually 
heavily  fined  for  not  possessing  them.  This  fine  was 
imposed  on  all  unchartercd  guilds  as  a  species  of 
annual  tax,  and  marked  a  decided  victory  for  the 
mercantile  party  and  "  city  barons  "  ;  but  while  it  has 
popularly  been  supposed  that  this  measure  had  as  its 
VOL.  I.— 10 


14G  LONDON. 

result  practically  the  dissolution  of  the  handicrafts- 
men's guilds,  such  was  not  the  case,  and,  in  the  same 
record  which  mentions  the  penalty  above  referred  to, 
we  find  their  names  a  little  later.  They  came,  how- 
ever, possibly  in  consequence,  to  be  all  included  in  one 
general  association  or  Town  Guild,  which  had  its 
place  of  meeting  in  a  hall  denominated  Guildhall, 
which  stood  in  Aldermanbury,  near  Cripplegate,  very 
near  the  site  of  the  present  edifice. 

The  very  tyrants  who  thus  oppressed  the  craftsmen 
class  in  the  city  were  among  those  who  extorted  the 
"Magna  Charta"  from  John  on  June  15,  1215. 
Geoffrey  Fitz-Piers  was,  in  fact,  a  descendant  of  that 
first  Geoffrey,  the  portreeve  to  whom  William  of  Nor- 
mandy addresses  himself  in  his  first  charter.  He 
only  survived  Henry  Fitz-Alwyn,  the  first  mayor, 
one  year,  but  Archbishop  Langton  took  his  place  at 
the  head  of  the  barons,  and,  on  May  12,  1213,  threw 
open  the  gates  to  their  forces,  led  by  Robert  Fitz- 
Water,  who  was  the  standard-bearer  of  the  city. 

The  great  charter  having,  however,  secured  to  the 
citizens  some  of  their  privileges  and  liberties,  among 
which  was  that  of  electing  their  own  mayor,  the  Com- 
mons, or  popular  party,  determined  that  they  also 
should  enjoy  some  of  the  fruits  of  the  struggle  in 
which  they  had  taken  so  important  a  part,  and  that 
the  mayoralty  and  all  the  official  places  should  in 
the  future  not  be  held  by  city  barons.  The  election 
of  Serlo  le  Mercer  to  the  civic  chair,  the  very  year 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   147 

of  the  signing  of  the  "  Magna  Charta,"  is  significant, 
inasmuch  as  he  was  the  first  member  of  a  craft  to 
secure  the  mayoralty.  That  he  had  no  aristocratic 
surname  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  he  was  known  by 
his  occupation.  In  the  removal  of  Jacob  Alderman 
from  the  mayoralty  in  1216,  and  the  substitution  of 
Solomon  de  Basinges,  we  find  a  temporary  triumph 
of  the  aristocratic  party  and  a  set  back  for  the  Com- 
mons; but  Serlo  le  Mercer  was  again  elected  in  1217, 
and  held  the  mayoralty  for  five  consecutive  years. 
He  was  succeeded,  in  1227,  by  Roger  le  Due,  a  man 
of  old  family  and  of  what,  if  it  is  admissible  to  use 
here  the  Roman  term,  may  be  called  the  "  patrician  " 
party.  All  went  peaceably  the  first  year,  but  in  the 
second  of  his  administration  a  contest  arose  in  regard 
to  his  two  deputies,  the  sheriffs,  Henry  de  Cockam 
and  Stephen  Bukerel,  who  were  also  of  old  and  dis- 
tinguished families,  and  had  held  office  under  Roger 
le  Due  for  two  consecutive  terms;  and  so  strongly 
did  the  popular  party  make  themselves  felt  that  all 
the  aldermen  and  principal  citizens  joined  in  an  oath 
that  in  the  future  the  same  man  should  never  serve 
as  sheriff  for  two  consecutive  terms.  Roger  le  Due 

o 

was  succeeded  in  the  civic  chair  by  Andrew  Bukerel 
in  1231,  and  the  latter  held  office  until  1238,  when 
Richard  Reinger  was  once  more  elected. 

Meanwhile,  however,  Henry  III.,  John's  eldest 
son,  had  succeeded  to  the  throne  on  the  death  of  his 
father  in  1216.  As  this  prince  ascended  the  throne 


148  LONDON. 

at  the  age  of  nine,  it  was  some  years  before  he  was 
sufficiently  mature  to  warrant  an  opinion  of  his 
character.  As  he  grew  to  man's  estate,  and  the  real 
authority  of  the  regal  office  devolved  upon  him,  it 
was  found  that  he  was  scarcely  fitted  by  nature  to 
hold  in  check  and  control  his  unruly  barons.  He 
was  gentle,  humane  and  merciful,  but  did  not  possess 
those  qualities  of  force  and  convincing  command 
which  were  essential  to  the  successful  ruler  in  those 
turbulent  times.  That  he  was  in  great  need  of  money 
there  seems  to  be  no  doubt.  His  military  reverses, 
and  the  unsuccessful  termination  of  several  of  his 
enterprises,  had  caused  him  serious  financial  embarrass- 
ment. Moreover,  he  had  accepted  from  the  Pope  the 
crown  of  Sicily  for  his  son  Edmund,  but  had  not  the 
wherewithal  to  push  his  claims.  His  exactions  from 
city  and  citizens  became  thus  a  severe  burden.  His 
consort,  Eleanor  of  Provence,  it  was  maintained  had 
introduced  a  foreign  influence  at  court.  It  was,  in 
fact,  for  her  uncle  Peter,  Count  of  Savoy,  that  Henry 
III.,  in  1245,  caused  to  be  constructed  Savoy  Palace, 
on  the  northern  bank  of  the  Thames,  between  the 
city  and  Westminster,  which  palace  became  his  Eng- 
lish residence.  He  finally  bestowed  it,  however,  on 
the  fraternity  of  Montjoy  ("  Fratres  de  Monte 
Jovis "),  by  whom  it  was  converted  into  a  priory  of 
their  order,  atid  thus  came  to  be  known  as  the  Priory 
of  Cornuto  by  Havering,  at  the  Bower  in  Essex.  It 
was  bought  of  the  friars  by  Eleanor  herself,  as  a  resi- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   149 

dence  for  Edmund,  Earl  of  Lancaster.  In  1293  a 
license  to  castellate  was  obtained.  The  whole  place 
was  altered  and  reconstructed  by  Henry,  fourth  Earl 
and  first  Duke  of  Lancaster ;  and  here  John,  King  of 
France,  was  detained  after  the  battle  of  Poictiers. 
The  palace  was  sacked  and  burned  by  Wat  Tyler  and 
his  followers  in  1391,  and  seems  to  have  lain  quite 
neglected  until  1505,  when  Henry  VII.  endowed  it 
as  a  hospital  for  the  relief  of  one  hundred  poor  people, 
and  dedicated  the  new  foundation  to  St.  John  the 
Baptist.  The  hospital  was  suppressed  in  1553,  under 
Edward  VI.,  but  re-endowed  by  Mary,  and  con- 
tinued to  be  maintained  as  a  hospital  until  the  first 
year  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,  when  it  was  finally 
dissolved.  In  1666  it  was  here  that  the  sick  and 
wounded  of  the  great  Dutch  War  were  lodged  and 
cared  for. 

The  last  vestige  of  the  palace  and  hospital  buildings 
was  destroyed  in  making  the  approaches  to  Waterloo 
Bridge,  and  nothing  to-day  remains  but  the  chapel, 
which,  though  dedicated  to  St.  Mary  le  Savoy,  yet 
as  part  inheritance  of  the  Duchy  of  Lancaster,  and 
therefore  crown  property,  is  more  usually  called  the 
Chapel  Royal  of  the  Savoy.  The  building  was  of  the 
perpendicular  style,  and  stood  north  and  south.  It 
was  largely  restored  in  1505-1508,  and  almost  rebuilt 
in  1721  ;  again  repaired  in  1820,  and  again  in  1843 
and  1860.  Largely  damaged  by  fire  in  July,  1864,  it 
was  restored  by  Queen  Victoria  at  her  own  expense ; 


150  LONDON. 

and  the  work  of  reconstruction  was  achieved  under  the 
supervision  of  Mr.  Sidney  Sniirke,  R.A.,  the  church 
being  finally  reopened  for  public  worship  by  Dean 
Stanley  on  November  26,  1865.  It  has  perhaps  a 
special  interest  as  the  place  where,  on  the  Restoration, 
the  <l  Savoy  Conference  " — that  is,  the  meetings  of  the 
Commission  appointed  for  the  revision  of  the  liturgy — 
was  held  in  1661  and  1662.  Fuller,  author  of  "  The 
Worthies,"  was  lecturer  at  the  Savoy,  and  Cowley, 
the  poet,  and  Doctor  Killigrew,  made  famous  in  the 
poetry  of  Dryden,  were  among  the  candidates  for  the 
mastership,  the  latter  being  the  successful  candidate, 
and  having  eventually  been,  buried  in  the  chapel. 
Charles  II.  established  a  French  church  here,  which 
is  now  removed  to  Bloomsbury  Street.  The  present 
edifice  is  surrounded  by  commercial  buildings,  and 
thus  stands  quite  hidden  from  the  general  passer-by 
between  the  Strand  and  the  Thames  Embankment. 
The  great  north  window  was  filled  with  painted  glass, 
at  the  expense  of  Queen  Victoria,  while  that  of  the 
south  was  subscribed  for  by  the  parishioners,  in  com- 
memoration of  the  recovery  of  the  Prince  of  Wales,  in 
1872.  There  are  a  number  of  more  or  less  interesting 
monuments,  including  ones  to  the  Countess  of  Dal- 
housie,  daughter  of  Sir  Allen  Apsley,  Lieutenant  of 
the  Tower,  the  Countess  of  Nottingham,  Dr.  Killi- 
grew and  his  daughter  Anne,  Sir  Richard  and  Lady 
Rokeby ;  besides  brasses  to  Gawain  Douglas,  Bishop 
of  Dunkeld,  translator  of  Virgil — this  brass  serving 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANT AGENETS.       151 

also  for  Bishop  Halsal — to  William  Chaworth,  and  a 
tablet,  erected  by  his  widow,  to  Richard  Lander,  the 
African  explorer. 

If  Henry's  reign  was  characterized  by  much  tur- 
bulence and  disturbance,  it  was  also  conspicuous  for 
the  peaceful  development  of  the  monastic  establish- 
ment, and  those  monastic  foundations  which  had  come 
into  existence  during  preceding  reigns  expanded  both 
in  wealth  and  influence.  In  the  case  of  the  Collegi- 
ate Church  of  St.  Peter,  commonly  called  of  West- 
minster Abbey,  it  being  contiguous  to  the  royal  palace 
itself,  the  king  had  taken  the  matter  personally  in 
hand.  By  him  the  Church  of  Edward  the  Confessor, 
which  had  fallen  into  disrepair,  was  almost  entirely 
rebuilt,  and  the  splendid  edifice  which  is  still  with  us 
to-day  is  that  which  we  owe  to  the  munificence  and 
noble  initiative  of  Henry  III.  The  church  itself  is 
in  the  form  of  a  Latin  cross,  and  with  the  exception 
of  the  chapel  of  Edward  the  Confessor,  and  a  few 
other  doubtful  remains,  and  the  western  towers,  which 
were  added  by  Wren,  is  Early  English.  The  principal 
entrance  is  by  the  west  portal,  though  the  abbey  may 
be  also  entered  by  the  portal  in  the  north  transept,  or 
that  in  the  south  transept,  near  the  Poets'  Corner. 
On  entering,  one  is  struck  at  once  with  the  great  im- 
pressiveness  of  the  interior,  and  one  steps,  as  it  were, 
cautiously  about,  fearful  of  breaking  in  upon  so  many 
centuries  of  hallowed  silence,  or  of  awakening  the  echo 
of  so  many  past  glories  and  pious  traditions.  The 


152  LONDON. 

chapel  of  Edward  the  Confessor,  which  faces  the  west 
entrance  in  the  centre  of  the  church,  and  forms,  as  it 
were,  the  rear  end  of  the  choir,  wherein  the  main  altar 
stands,  is  the  most  ancient  part  of  the  existing  edifice, 
and  is  the  principal  Norman  remain.  Here  are  the 
two  coronation  chairs:  that  of  the  Scottish  kings,  con- 
taining, under  its  seat,  the  famous  stone  of  Scone — 
emblem  of  the  power  of  the  Scottish  princes — brought, 
according  to  tradition,  from  the  East  by  returning 
Crusaders,  and  originally  the  very  stone  on  which 
Jacob  rested  his  head  when  he  had  the  vision  of  the 
ladder;  the  other  the  new  coronation  chair  made  for 
Queen  Mary  II.  on  the  model  of  the  older  one. 
Here  we  find  also  the  shrine  of  Edward  the  Confessor, 
erected  by  order  of  Henry  III.  in  1269.  Here  also 
are  the  tombs  of  Henry  III.  himself;  of  Edward  I. 
and  of  his  wife  Eleanor  of  Castile;  of  Edward  III. 
and  his  wife  Philippa  of  Hainault ;  of  Richard  II. 
and  of  his  wife  Anne  of  Bohemia ;  of  John,  Bishop 
of  Salisbury  (died  1395);  and  of  Thomas,  Duke  of 
Gloucester  (died  1397). 

Behind  the  chapel  of  Edward  the  Confessor  is 
that  which  Henry  VII.  caused  to  be  constructed,  and 
which  bears  his  name.  It  is  approached  by  a  flight 
of  twelve  black  marble  steps,  and  was  erected  on  the 
site  of  the  old  chapel  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin.  The 
gates  are  especially  noticeable.  They  are  of  fine  brass 
work,  and  the  roses  which  figure  in  the  decoration 
thereof  are  in  allusion  to  the  marriage  of  Henry  VII. 


Screen  in  King;  Henry  VIFs  Chapel, 
Westminster  Abbey 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  PLANT AGENETS.       153 

with  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Edward  IV.,  whereby 
the  houses  of  York  and  Lancaster  came  to  be  united. 
The  chapel  contains  the  stalls  of  the  Knights  of  the 
Order  of  the  Bath,  and  the  lower  seats  are  for  their 
squires ;  but  the  special  glory  of  the  chapel  is  the  ceil- 
ing, with  its  curious  fan  tracery  and  fantastic  penden- 
tives,  each  surface  being  covered  with  a  fine  fretwork, 
illustrative  of  the  most  luxuriant  period  of  the  per- 
pendicular style.  Here  we  find  the  tombs  of  Henry 
VII.  himself  and  his  wife  Elizabeth  of  York,  which 
occupy  the  centre  of  the  chapel,  and  are  enclosed  in  a 
chantry  of  brass.  In  the  same  vault  beneath,  James 
I.  is  also  laid  at  rest,  while  George  II.  and  quite  a 
number  of  the  present  dynasty  have  been  interred 
without  monuments  in  the  vault  immediately  in  front 
of  that  in  which  Henry  VIII.  lies.  Around  the 
central  tomb,  against  the  partition  walls,  as  it  were,  are 
the  tombs  of  George,  Duke  of  Buckingham  (assassin- 
ated 1628) ;  John,  Duke  of  Buckingham  (died  1807); 
Lewis,  Duke  of  Richmond  (died  1623) ;  Esme  Stuart 
(died  1661);  and  lastly,  that  of  the  Duke  of  Mont- 
pensier,  brother  of  Louis  Phillippe,  king  of  the 
French  (died  1809).  The  two  so-called  aisles,  adjoin- 
ing the  chapel  on  either  side,  contain  the  following 
tombs :  that  on  the  right,  the  tombs  of  Mary,  Queen 
of  the  Scots;  of  Margaret,  Countess  of  Richmond, 
mother  of  Henry  VII.  (died  1509) ;  Lady  Margaret 
Douglas,  his  grand-daughter  (died  1577) ;  George, 
Duke  of  Albemarle  (died  1670) ;  and  of  Lady  Wai- 


154  LONDON. 

pole  (died  1737) ;  while  in  the  vault  beneath  are 
buried  Charles  II.,  Queen  Mary  II.  and  her  consort, 
William  of  Orange;  Queen  Anne  and  her  consort, 
George  of  Denmark ;  that  on  the  left,  the  tombs  of 
Queen  Elizabeth;  of  Edward  V.  and  his  brother,  the 
Duke  of  York,  the  murdered  "Princes  of  the  Tower"; 
Mary,  daughter  of  James  I.  (died  1607);  Sophia, 
daughter  of  James  I.  (died  1607);  George,  Marquis 
of  Halifax  (died  1695) ;  and  of  Charles,  Earl  of  Hali- 
fax (1715).  The  latter  was  distinguished  both  as 
lord  keeper  of  the  privy  seal  and  as  patron  of  Addi- 
son. 

In  the  chapels  surrounding  that  of  Edward  the 
Confessor — that  is,  those  dedicated  to  the  so  called 
Edmund,  "King  of  the  East  Angles,"  St.  Nich- 
olas, St.  Paul  and  St.  John  the  Baptist — are  also 
many  tombs  or  monuments,  the  most  important  of 
which  are  perhaps  those  of  Prince  John,  second  son 
of  Edward  II.  (died  1334),  and  of  Mary,  Duchess 
of  Suffolk,  grandmother  of  Lady  Jane  Grey  (died 
1558),  in  the  Chapel  of  St.  Edmund;  of  Philippa, 
Duchess  of  York,  wife  of  Edward,  Duke  of  York, 
who  fell  at  Agincourt  (died  1431),  and  of  Anne, 
Duchess  of  Somerset,  wife  of  the  Protector  and  sister 
of  Jane  Seymour,  third  wife  of  Henry  VIII.  (died 
1 582),  in  the  Chapel  of  St.  Nicholas ;  of  James  Watt, 
the  great  mechanician  and  improver  of  the  steam 
engine  (died  1819),  and  of  Sir  Rowland  Hill,  the  orig- 
inator of  the  system  of  penny  postage  (died  1879),  in 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   155 

the  Chapel  of  St.  Paul ;  and  of  William  of  Colchester, 
Thomas  Milyng  and  Gustave  Fascet,  abbots  of  West- 
minster (died  in  1420,  1492  and  1500,  respectively), 
and  Thomas,  Earl  of  Exeter,  privy  councillor  under 
James  I.,  and  his  wife  (died  1622),  in  the  Chapel  of 
St.  John  the  Baptist. 

The  choir  extends  beyond  the  transepts  into  the 
nave.  The  fine  woodwork  is  that  which  was  placed 
there  in  1848.  In  the  transepts,  as  in  the  aisles  of 
the  choir  and  of  the  nave,  are  the  tombs  and  monu- 
ments of  many  distinguished  persons.  Thus  in  the 
north  transept  are  the  monuments  of  William,  Earl 
of  Chatham  (died  1778);  William,  Earl  of  Mansfield 
(died  1793);  George  Canning  (died  1827);  Henry, 
Viscount  Palmerston  (died  1865);  and  Benjamin, 
Earl  of  Beaconsfield  (died  1881).  In  the  north  aisle, 
those  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton  (died  1726);  William  Pitt, 
the  renowned  statesman  (died  1806);  William  Wil- 
berforce,  the  great  advocate  of  the  emancipation  of  the 
slaves  (died  1833);  and  Henry,  Lord  Holland  (died 
1 840).  In  the  south  aisle,  the  monuments  of  William 
Congreve,  the  great  dramatist  (died  1728);  Dr.  Isaac 
Watts,  the  famous  divine  (died  1748);  Major  Andre 
(executed  in  America,  1780);  John  Wesley,  founder 
of  the  Methodists  (died  1791);  and  of  William 
Wordsworth,  the  poet  (died  1850).  Finally,  in  the 
south  transept,  of  which  a  portion  is  commonly  called 
the  "Poets'  Corner,"  are  the  monuments  of  Geoffrey 
Chaucer  (died  1400),  Edmund  Spenser  (died  1598), 


156  LONDON. 

Shakespeare  (died  1616),  Michael  Drayton  (died  1631), 
Ben  Jonson  (died  1637),  Milton  (died  1674),  Samuel 
Butler  (died  1680),  Dryden  (died  1700),  Addison  (died 
1710),  James  Thomson,  the  poet  of  the  seasons  (died 
1748),*  Handel,  the  composer  (died  1759);  Thomas 
Gray  (died  1771),  Oliver  Goldsmith  (died  1774), 
David  Garrick,  the  great  actor  (died  1779);  Robert 
Burns  (died  1796),  Robert  Southey  (died  1843),  Ma- 
caulay  (died  1859),  Thackeray  (died  1863),  Charles 
Dickens  (died  1870),  George  Grote,  the  historian  of 
Greece  (died  1871),  and  Henry  \Vadsworth  Long- 
fellow, the  American  poet  (died  in  1882). 

The  ancient  chapter  house  adjoining  the  abbey 
church,  and  which  had  been  erected  in  1250,  was  not 
disturbed  by  Henry  III.  in  his  alterations,  and  is 
therefore  considerably  older  than  the  body  of  the 
church  itself.  To  the  south  of  the  entrance  of  the 
chapter  house  is  the  entrance  of  the  Chapel  of  the 
Pyx,  the  name  given  to  the  box  in  which  the  stand- 
ards of  gold  and  silver  were  kept,  and  which  was 
once  the  treasury  of  the  kings  of  England;  while 
opposite  the  entrance  of  the  chapter  house  is  the 
staircase  ascending  to  the  Muniment  Room  or  Ar- 
chives of  the  Abbey,  and  to  the  triforium,  from 
which  a  splendid  view  of  the  interior  may  be  had. 
It  is  in  the  Jerusalem  Chamber,  to  the  southwest  of 
the  abbey  church,  that  the  sovereigns  of  England 
have  donned  their  robes  of  state,  prior  to  proceeding 
into  the  church  for  their  coronation.  It  contains  five 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   157 

frescoes,  portraying  the  death  of  Henry  TV.  and  the 
coronation  of  Queen  Victoria.  The  great  repairs  and 
alterations  undertaken  by  Henry  III.  were  extended 
also  to  Westminster  Hall,  and,  while  John  by  his 
charter  had  there  established  the  Common  Pleas, 
Henry  III.  fixed  the  King's  Bench  also  at  West- 
minster Hall. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  it  was  only  West- 
minster Abbey  which  profited  by  the  patronage  and 
encouragement  of  Henry  III.,  for  not  only  did  exist- 
ing monastic  foundations  attain  greater  development 
during  his  beneficent  reign,  but  new  foundations 
sprang  up  on  all  sides.  Already,  as  early  as  1210, 
Herbert  de  Bergh  had,  it  is  related,  given  his  house 
(afterwards  Whitehall)  to  some  friars  of  the  then 
recently-founded  Order  of  St.  Dominic.  This  they 
subsequently  sold,  however,  to  Gray,  Archbishop  of 
York,  and  it  remained  until  the  days  of  Wolsey  the 
London  residence  of  the  Archbishops  of  York.  The 
order  had  as  yet  not  obtained  its  official  confirmation, 
and  did  not  succeed  in  this  until  1216,  when  it  was 
formally  confirmed  by  Honorius  III.  This  perhaps 
accounts  for  the  fact  that  there  does  not  appear  any 
official  record  of  their  presence  in  England  until  the 
arrival,  in  1221,  of  Gilbert  de  Fraxineto  and  the 
thirteen  friars  who  accompanied  him.  On  their  arrival 
in  London  they  were  assigned  a  piece  of  ground 
"without  the  wall  of  the  city,  by  Oldbourne  (Hoi- 
born),  and  near  unto  the  Temple,"  and  here  they 


158  LONDON. 

erected  buildings  and  established  a  priory.  The 
friars,  however,  do  not  seem  to  have  been  satisfied 
with  their  quarters,  and,  after  fifty-five  years  of  resi- 
dence, they  removed  from  Holborn  to  a  piece  of 
ground  which  the  then  mayor,  Gregory  de  Rokesle, 
caused  to  be  set  aside  for  their  use  in  the  ward  of 
Castle  Baynard. 

This  ward  was  so  called  from  Castle  Baynard, 
which  in  turn  derived  its  name  from  Ralph  Bainar- 
dus,  a  Norman  associate  of  William  the  Conqueror, 
by  whom  it  was  erected.  It  was  forfeited,  however, 
in  1111,  by  William  Baynard,  Baron  of  Dunmow, 
and  was  granted  by  Henry  I.  to  Robert  Fitzgerald, 
son  of  Gilbert,  Earl  of  Clare.  In  1213  Robert  Fitz- 
walter,  who  had  succeeded  to  the  castle,  was,  for  taking 
part  with  the  barons,  banished  from  the  realm,  and 
the  castle  dismantled ;  but  a  year  or  two  later  he  was 
recalled  and  pardoned,  and  the  king  even  went  so  far 
as  to  declare  him  the  rightful  chief  bannerer  and  cas- 
tellan of  the  city  of  London.  It  was  the  site  of  this 
castle  which  came  to  be  included  in  the  precinct  of 
Bluckfriars,  as  the  Dominican  friars  soon  came  to  be 
called,  because  of  the  sombre  hue  of  their  scapular, 
thereby  to  distinguish  them  from  the  friars  of  other 
orders  who  had  foundations  in  London — not  that  of 
the  Castle  Baynard  of  later  origin.  The  latter, 
erected  in  1428  by  Humphrey,  Duke  of  Gloucester, 
was  built  on  land  also  on  the  banks  of  the  Thames, 
below  Thames  Street,  but  within  the  city.  On  the 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.       159 

attainder  of  the  Duke  of  Gloucester,  it  reverted  to 
the  crown,  in  whose  possession  it  remained  until  the 
reign  of  Elizabeth,  by  whom  it  was  leased  to  the  Earl 
of  Pembroke.  Here  it  was,  in  1483,  that  that  great 
council  of  nobles  and  prelates  who  had  assembled 
together  to  arrange  for  the  coronation  of  Edward  V. 
met  from  day  to  day;  and  here  it  was  therefore  that, 
after  the  murder  of  Hastings,  Staiford,  Duke  of 
Buckingham,  offered  the  crown  to  Richard  III. 
Here  it  was  that  Henry  VII.  and  his  consort  lodged 
and  refreshed  themselves  on  the  occasion  of  their  sev- 
eral visits  of  ceremony  to  the  city;  here,  in  1503, 
lodged  the  King  of  Castile,  on  his  visit  to  England ; 
and  here,  in  1553,  did  the  great  council  of  the  State 
meet  to  proclaim  the  Princess  Mary,  daughter  of 
Henry  VIII.,  Queen  of  England.  The  castle  was, 
as  we  have  said,  leased  by  Queen  Elizabeth  to  the 
Earl  of  Pembroke;  and  here  the  brothers  to  whom 
the  folio  of  Shakespeare  was  dedicated — William, 
Earl  of  Pembroke,  and  Philip,  Earl  of  Pembroke 
and  Montgomery — wore  in  1641  respectively  installed 
as  Chancellors  of  the  University  of  Oxford ;  and  here 
the  latter' s  second  wife,  Anne,  Countess  of  Pembroke, 
Dorset  and  Montgomery,  resided,  while  her  husband, 
as  Lord  Chamberlain,  lived  at  the  Cockpit  in  White- 
hall. Already  in  1720,  we  are  told,  "only  a  round 
tower,  part  of  Baynard's  Castle,"  remained,  and,  with 
fragments  of  other  outlying  buildings,  had  been  con- 
verted into  private  dwellings.  To-day  no  trace  is  left 


160  LONDON. 

of  the  historic  pile,  though  the  memory  of  it  is  still 
preserved  in  the  name  of  the  ward  of  Castle  Baynard, 
and  in  the  sign  of  a  new  tavern  Avhich  has  recently 
been  erected,  at  the  corner  of  St.  Andrew's  Hill,  in 
Queen  Victoria  Street. 

The  Castle  Baynard,  which  was  included  within 
the  precincts  of  Blackfriars,  was,  as  we  have  seen, 
however,  in  a  much  more  westerly  situation.  To  the 
privileges  obtained  from  the  then  mayor,  Gregory  de 
Rokesle,  they  secured  large  contributions  from  Robert 
Kilwardly,  then  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  towards 
the  building  of  their  church,  St.  Anne,  Blackfriars; 
and  Edward  I.,  by  a  charter  granted  in  1311,  con- 
firmed to  them  the  gift  of  Castle  Baynard  and  the 
Tower  of  Mountfichet.  In  fact,  he  went  so  far  as  to 
allow  the  friars  to  pull  down  the  city  wall,  so  as  to 
take  in  all  the  land  to  the  west  as  far  as  the  Fleet; 
and  thus  wras  formed  that  precinct  which  came  to  be 
known  as  Blackfriars,  and  which  has  given  its  name 
not  only  to  the  district,  but  to  Blackfriars  Bridge. 
Edward  I.  and  his  consort,  Eleanor  of  Castile,  also 
liberally  contributed  to  the  endowment  of  the  priory 
itself,  the  most  distinguishing  feature  of  which  was 
its  great  hall,  in  which  more  than  one  solemn  assem- 
blage of  notable  ecclesiastics  wras  held.  Here  it  was, 
on  January  17,  1382,  that  that  great  assemblage  sat, 
which  had  been  summoned  together  by  William  Cour- 
tcnay,  then  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  to  examine 
and  condemn  the  twenty-four  articles  drawn  from  the 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   161 

writings  of  Wycliffe.  There  were  present  ten  bish- 
ops, thirty  doctors  of  theology,  six  doctors  and  four 
bachelors  of  laws,  besides  other  important  personages, 
and  the  proceedings  were  at  their  height,  when  the 
whole  assembly  was  much  shaken  up  by  an  earth- 
quake, from  which  the  council  came  to  be  called  the 
"Earthquake  Council."  Here  it  was  also  that  the 
divorce  of  Henry  VIII.  from  his  august  consort, 
Katherine  of  Arragon,  was  tried  before  the  papal 
legate,  Cardinal  Campeggio. 

The  establishment  of  the  Dominicans  at  Holborn, 
their  first  resting-place,  had  been  promptly  followed 
by  the  advent  in  London  of  nine  friars  of  the  then 
also  recently-founded  Order  of  St.  Francis,  commonly 
called  "Greyfriars,"  from  the  color  of  their  habit. 
Of  these  nine  who  landed  at  Dover,  in  the  eighth 
year  of  the  reign  of  Henry  III. — that  is,  in  1223-'24 
— five  settled  in  Canterbury  and  four  came  on  to 
London.  For  the  first  fifteen  days  after  their  arrival, 
the  latter  enjoyed  the  hospitality  of  the  Dominicans 
in  Holborn,  at  the  expiration  of  which  time,  having 
acquired  the  good  will  of  the  then  mayor,  one  Richard 
Renger,  they  removed  to  Cornhill,  where  they  at  once 
established  themselves.  Their  next  move  was  to  a 
piece  of  land  off  Newgate,  near  St.  Nicholas  Sham- 
bles, where  a  certain  John  Ewyn,  mercer,  had  donated 
to  them  a  space  of  ground.  Here  they  erected  a  large 
number  of  buildings,  including  a  church,  a  chapter 
house,  a  dormitory,  a  refectory,  an  infirmary  and 
VOL.  I.— 11 


162  LONDON. 

other  conventual  constructions,  the  expense  being 
sustained  by  several  citizens.  Robert,  Lord  Lisle, 
became  a  friar  of  the  order,  and  that  famous  Lord 
Mayor,  Richard  Whytington,  caused  to  be  erected  at 
his  expense  a  splendid  library  for  their  use.  They 
thus  found  themselves,  within  two  centuries  of  their 
first  landing,  in  influential  and  affluent  circumstances, 
and  provided  with  every  facility  for  fulfilling  their 
mission. 

Meanwhile  the  Order  of  the  Carthusians  had  by 
Henry  III.  been  established  in  1233,  in  Chancery 
Lane,  where  they  had  founded  a  priory  and  house  for 
the  reception  and  maintenance  of  those  Jews  and 
infidels  who  were  converted  to  the  Christian  faith. 
It  was  erected  on  the  site  of  certain  Jews'  houses, 
which  had  been  forfeited  to  the  king,  where  now 
stand  the  chapel  and  office  of  the  Rolls.  The  next  to 
arrive  in  England  were  friars  of  the  Order  of  Mount 
Carmel,  commonly  called  Carmelites,  or  Whitefriars, 
on  account  of  the  color  of  their  habit.  They  landed 
in  1241,  and  were  hospitably  received  by  Henry  III., 
who  assigned  to  them  a  certain  precinct  to  the  west 
of  Blackfriars  and  to  the  east  of  the  Temple,  so  that 
they  were  situated  between  the  two.  Among  their 
greatest  benefactors  were  one  Richard  Gray,  knight, 
who  bore  the  expense  of  building  their  church,  Hugh 
Courtenay,  Earl  of  Devon,  who  reconstructed  it  some 
years  later,  and  Robert  Marshall,  Bishop  of  Hereford, 
who  built  the  choir,  presbytery  and  steeple.  The 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   163 

Austin  friars,  or  friars  of  the  Order  of  St.  Augus- 
tin,  were  the  next  arrivals,  some  twelve  years  later, 
when  in  1253  they  founded  a  house  in  Old  Broad 
Street,  Broad  Street  Ward,  and  the  last  to  arrive  upon 
the  scene  were  the  so-called  Crutched  Friars,  who, 
landing  in  1298,  founded  a  house  between  Jewry 
Street,  Aldgate,  and  Mark  Lane. 

This  Jewry  Street  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the 
Jewry  to  the  north  of  Cheapside,  which  was  already 
by  this  time  abandoned  by  the  Jews,  who  had  found 
more  congenial,  obscure  and  therefore  undisturbed 
quarters  near  the  Tower,  and  termed  therefore  the 
Old  Jewry.  They  did  not  remain  long,  however,  in 
quiet  possession  of  their  new  settlement,  for  in  1291, 
under  Edward  I.,  they  were  all  banished  from  the 
kingdom,  and  when  they  finally  were  allowed  to  re- 
turn, they  sought  new  quarters  in  and  about  Aldgate, 
which  they  have  in  a  great  measure  inhabited  up  to 
the  present  time.  In  fact,  Rag  Fair,  in  the  precincts 
behind  the  Tower  and  to  the  south  of  Whitechapel, 
derives  its  appellation  from  the  mart  of  old  clothes 
and  second-hand  raiment  which  is  held  there  continu- 
ously, but  more  especially  on  Saturday  evenings, 
when  the  street  scene  is,  even  to  this  day.  well  worth 
a  visit. 

The  reign  of  Henry  III.  is  perhaps  of  more  than 
usual  interest  to  a  historian  of  the  city's  liberties,  as 
it  was  during  that  period  that,  in  the  midst  of  the 
chaos  and  confusion  which  was  the  distinguishing  char- 


164  LONDON. 

acteristic  of  those  disorderly  times,  both  in  national 
and  municipal  politics,  there  arose  a  man  who  to 
the  strength  of  his  convictions  united  the  ability  to 
carry  out  his  plans  and  bring  them  to  a  successful 
conclusion.  This  man  was  Thomas  Fitz-Thomas. 
What  Simon  de  Montfort  was  to  national  England 
Thomas  Fitz-Thomas  was  to  civic  London.  He  had 
acted  as  sheriff  under  the  mayor  Ralph  Hardel,  in 
1257,  and  the  famous  green  seal-roll  had  been  found 
at  Windsor,  and  exploited  during  his  term  of  office. 
In  1261  Thomas  Fitz-Thomas  was  elected  to  the 
mayoralty,  which  office  he  retained  for  five  consecu- 
tive years.  It  was  during  his  term  of  office  that 
Henry  III.,  under  the  plea  of  illness,  made  his  retreat 
to  the  French  court,  while  Simon  de  Montfort  was 
making  his  preparations  to  enforce  the  Provisions  of 
Oxford ;  and  the  second  year  of  his  mayoralty  was 
signalized  by  the  endeavor  made  by  the  Constable  of 
the  Tower  to  exact  " prisage"  from  vessels  coming  up 
the  Thames  with  corn,  an  attempt  defeated  by  the 
citizens  under  the  leadership  of  Fitz-Thomas  himself. 
His  greatest  achievement  was,  however,  perhaps  that 
whereby,  when  Simon  de  Montfort  in  the  first  flush 
of  his  success  promised  the  citizens  that  if  they  would 
formulate  such  demands  as  would  be  to  their  advan- 
tage, he  would  secure  for  them  their  ratification  by  the 
king  in  council,  Fitz-Thomas  obtained  the  legalization 
of  the  trade  guilds.  If  Fitz-Thomas  was  at  once 
loyal  to  the  crown  and  faithful  to  his  trust  as  guar- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANT AGENETS.       165 

dian  of  the  city's  liberties,  honor  must,  however,  also 
be  paid  to  the  name  of  Walter  Harvey,  the  politi- 
cal disciple  of  Fitz-Thomas.  Harvey  had  held  a 
sheriffship  under  him  in  the  last  year  of  his  mayor- 
alty, and  was  himself  elected  to  that  office  in  1271. 
He  it  was  who  wielded  the  city  mace  when  the  death 
of  Henry  III.  placed  the  latter's  eldest  son  Edward 
I.  upon  the  throne. 

With  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Henry  III.  a  new 
era,  as  it  were,  began  in  the  government  of  the  city. 
The  power  of  the  great  landowners  was  curtailed,  and 
as  such  they  ceased  to  have  a  voice  in  the  municipal 
administration.  The  office  of  alderman  became  purely 
elective.  The  whole  constitution  of  the  city,  as  it 
were,  underwent  a  change,  and  the  oligarchy  was 
definitely  broken  up.  The  great  dread  of  the  Lon- 
doners that  they  would,  like  the  great  cities  of  the 
continent,  fall  under  the  absolute  control  of  the  sover- 
eign, had  not  come  to  pass,  and  the  danger  had  been 
averted.  Under  these  changed  conditions,  Walter 
Harvey  succeeded  in  1271  as  wielder  of  the  city  mace 
and  champion  of  popular  rights.  To  him  the  city 
companies  are  largely  indebted  for  their  rise  and 
influence.  As  we  have  seen,  the  handicraftsmen's 
guilds  had  failed  in  a  former  attempt  to  obtain  a  legal 
recognition  of  the  rights  which  they  had  acquired  by 
prescription  by  the  grant  of  charters  of  incorporation. 
Harvey  now  decided  that  he  would,  as  chief  executive 
of  the  city,  independently  of  the  royal  pleasure  or 


166  LONDON. 

permission,  grant  charters  of  incorjx>ration  to  the 
handicraftsmen's  guilds,  and  by  so  doing  called  into 
existence  a  new  and  very  potent  civic  and  commercial 
force.  It  is  true  that  he  merely  carried  out  the  policy 
which  Fitz-Thomas  had  inaugurated  under  Simon  de 
Moutfort;  but,  while  said  charters  were  subsequently 
forfeited  and  held  to  be  invalid  by  the  royal  execu- 
tive, who  had  been  ignored  in  the  matter,  yet  they 
gave  to  the  companies  corporate  life,  which  even  the 
subsequent  forfeiture  did  not  cause  them  to  lose. 

Such  were  the  conditions  which  governed  the  city 
companies  when  Edward  I.  ascended  the  throne  of 
England.  Many  of  those  advantages  which  they  had 
gained  during  the  reign  of  Henry  III.  and  the  mayor- 
alty of  Harvey,  they  lost  during  the  succeeding  reign. 
The  rule  of  Edward  I.  in  London  was  a  stern  one. 
No  sooner  had  Harvey  stepped  from  the  civic  throne 
than  the  validity  of  his  charters  was,  as  we  have 
seen,  called  into  question  ;  and  on  New  Year's  day, 
1274,  two  years  after  the  accession  of  Edward  I.,  at 
a  great  meeting  held  at  the  Guildhall,  presided  over 
by  the  mayor,  Gregory  de  Rokesle,  said  charters  were 
declared  to  be  null  and  void,  and  the  privileges 
granted  therein  to  be  non-existent.  Harvey  had, 
however,  given  to  the  companies  a  corporative  life 
which  it  was  not  easy  to  destroy. 

The  year  1284  is  the  first  in  which  we  have  the 
names  of  those  members  sent  to  represent  the  city  in 
the  nation's  Parliament,  which  Edward  I.  had  sum- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   167 

moned  to  meet  at  Shrewsbury.  Of  the  representa- 
tives of  the  city,  Henry  le  Waleys,  then  mayor,  and 
Gregory  de  Rokesle,  who  had  occupied  the  civic 
throne  from  1274  to  1281,  were  the  most  distin- 
guished. These  two  men  were  of  great  shrewdness 
and  remarkable  ability.  The  former  was  a  wine 
merchant,  and  the  latter  a  goldsmith  and  a  wool 
merchant.  Both  had  served  as  sheriffs  together  under 
the  late  king.  Both  had  been  in  attendance  on 
Edward  I.  when  in  Gascony,  and  had  ruled  the  city 
during  the  first  twelve  years  of  the  king's  reign.  But 
while  they  exerted  a  benevolent  influence  in  many 
ways,  and  were  themselves  liberal  and  generous  in 
their  benefactions,  having  a  large  and  lofty  view  of 
their  duties  as  citizens,  Waleys  having,  among  other 
donations,  given  large  sums  for  the  erection  of  the  old 
Christ  Church  in  Newgate  Street,  while  Rokesle  had 
given  largely  towards  the  dormitories ;  yet  both  were 
too  much  engrossed  in  the  pursuit  of  their  private 
business  to  pay  the  proper  amount  of  attention  to  the 
government  of  the  city.  The  king,  whether  because 
he  regarded  them  as  too  vigilant  of  the  city's  interests, 
or  whether  he  was  at  that  particular  time  playing  into 
the  hands  of  the  Commons  as  against  the  city  mag- 
nates, demanded  that  the  mayor  appear  before  the 
king's  judges,  then  holding  their  assizes  in  the  Tower, 
and  answer  for  the  "  peace  of  the  city." 

This  eventful  June  29,  1284,  Gregory  de  Rokesle, 
who  again  was  mayor,  donned  his  rol>es  of  office  at 


168  LONDON. 

his  house,  which  was  situated  in  Milk  Street,  and 
proceeded  in  state  to  the  Tower,  followed  by  his 
sheriffs  and  aldermen,  in  full  civic  procession.  At 
the  entrance,  however,  he  divested  himself  before 
crossing  the  drawbridge,  and  thus  presented  himself 
in  plain  citizen's  clothes  before  John  de  Kirkby,  who 
was  sitting  as  judge  of  assize  in  the  royal  fortress.  It 
was  then  that  followed  the  oft-told  scene  in  which 
Gregory  de  Rokesle  declined  to  answer  the  questions 
which  were  put  to  him,  on  the  ground  that  no  law  or 
precedent  bound  him  to  do  so.  What  followed  is 
equally  well  known.  How,  though  he  was  allowed  to 
withdraw  unmolested,  he,  and  a  large  number  of  citi- 
zens who  had  accompanied  him,  Avere  arrested  while 
attending  a  court  of  the  king  at  Westminster,  the  day 
following,  and  he  himself,  and  those  who  had  accom- 
panied him  on  the  occasion  of  his  journey  to  the 
Tower  the  preceding  day,  were  actually  imprisoned 
for  several  days,  during  which  interval  the  king, 
adopting  the  plea  that,  Rokesle  being  imprisoned,  the 
city  was  Avithout  a  mayor,  appointed  Sir  Ralph  dc 
Sandwich  warden  of  the  city.  Xor  Avas  Rokesle  per- 
mitted to  resume  his  office.  The  office  of  mayor  went 
therefore  into  temporary  abeyance,  and  the  functions 
of  the  city's  chief  magistrate  continued  to  be  admin- 
istered by  a  king-appointed  Avarden  until  1296,  Avhen 
the  king,  being  in  great  need  of  money,  offered  to 
restore  the  city's  liberties  for  the  sum  of  twenty-three 
thousand  marks.  The  offer  Avas  accepted,  and  Henry 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   169 

le  Waleys  stepped  once  more  into  the  office  he  had 
so  long  occupied;  and  thus  was  the  mayoralty  re- 
established. 

But  Edward  had  other  troubles  besides  disputes 
with  civic  officials,  for  in  1290  his  beloved  consort, 
Eleanor  of  Castile,  died  at  Grantham.  He  decided 
that  her  funeral  pageant  should  at  least  exhibit  the 
true  state  of  his  feelings.  It  was  a  very  grand  aifair. 
Twelve  times  did  the  funeral  procession  halt  on  its 
way  from  Grautham  to  Westminster  Abbey.  On  each 
occasion  great  services  were  held,  and  at  each  of  the 
twelve  halting-places  a  monumental  cross  was  erected. 
The  twelfth  stop  was  made  about  half-way  between 
London  and  Westminster,  at  the  place  where  the 
Charing  Cross  (sometimes  said  to  be  derived  from 
"chere  reine")  monument  is  situated.  The  monu- 
ment, designed  and  begun  by  one  Roger  de  Cruii- 
dale,  was  not  completed  when  he  died.  The  stone 
came  from  Caen,  and  the  marble  for  the  steps  was 
brought  from  Corfe,  in  Dorsetshire.  By  the  order 
of  the  Long  Parliament,  the  crosses  were  ordered 
down  May  3,  1643;  but  the  order  was  evidently  not 
put  into  effect  as  regards  Charing  Cross  until  four 
years  later.  The  site  of  the  cross  was  made  the  scene 
of  a  number  of  executions,  notably  those  of  four  of  the 
regicides.  A  monument  in  imitation  of  the  original 
has,  however,  recently  been  set  up,  and  stands  in  front 
of  the  Charing  Cross  terminus  of  the  Southeastern 
Railway. 


170  LONDON. 

But  if  the  funeral  of  Eleanor  was  made  the  occa- 
sion of  splendid  pageantry,  the  occasion  of  Edward's 
marriage  with  Margaret  of  France  was  made  the  rea- 
son for  festivities  of  an  equally  brilliant  character. 
A  magnificent  pageant  was  organized  by  the  city  of 
London,  in  which  every  guild  was  represented.  The 
Fishmongers  particularly  distinguished  themselves, 
a  statue  of  St.  Magnus,  which  formed,  as  it  were,  the 
central  feature  of  their  exhibit,  being  paraded  with 
great  pomp  through  the  streets.  In  the  description 
of  the  pageant  we  have  the  first  distinct  mention  of 
the  great  livery  companies,  who,  though  unrecognized 
by  royal  charter,  save  in  the  instance  of  the  Weavers, 
were  honored  by  the  royal  thanks  and  many  marked 
tokens  of  high  consideration.  The  Weavers  were 
again  the  most  fortunate,  for  they  obtained,  as  we  have 
seen,  a  charter  so  liberal  in  its  provisions  that  they 
were  thereby  led  to  overstep  the  limits  of  prudence  in 
their  pretensions,  and  suffered  as  has  been  related,  in 
consequence,  during  the  reign  of  Edward  IT.,  and  the 
division  of  the  guild  followed.  The  reign  of  this 
monarch  was  a  period  of  much  turbulence  and  excite- 
ment. Disorders  of  various  kinds  disgraced  the 
country,  and  gave  evidence  to  the  restlessness  of  the 
times.  The  city  itself  was  in  a  state  of  great  con- 
fusion. A  certain  John  de  Wentgrave  kept  the 
mayoralty  for  three  years  by  illegal  means.  Popular 
outbreaks  occurred  constantly.  The  king  seems  to 
have  made  and  unmade  mayors  at  his  pleasure. 


Eleanor's  Cross,  Charing  Cross 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   171 

Nicholas  de  Farringdone  and  Hamo  de  Chigwell  seem 
to  have  been  veritable  rivals  for  the  mayoralty.  In 
the  difficulties  between  the  king  and  the  queen, 
Farringdone,  who  was  a  goldsmith  and  enormously 
wealthy,  seems  to  have  supported  the  queen's  side, 
while  Hamo  de  Chigwell  sustained  the  king's  faction. 
The  former  was  in  office  in  1320,  when  the  king,  on 
some  trumped  excuse,  deposed  him,  and  appointed 
Chigwell  in  his  place ;  while  he  in  turn  incurred  the 
king's  displeasure,  and  was  replaced  by  Farringdone 
for  the  period  of  one  year,  and  he  it  was  who  still 
held  the  mayoralty  when  Edward  III.  ascended  the 
throne. 

One  of  this  young  monarch's  first  acts  was  to  grant 
a  charter  to  the  city  which  considerably  enlarged  the 
privileges  already  conferred  upon  the  citizens.  The 
mayor  was  then  declared  to  be  a  justice  of  the  goal 
of  Newgate,  from  which  it  has  been  held  that  that 
official  first  obtained  his  title  of  "lord,"  though,  in 
point  of  fact,  no  such  grant  was  therein  specifically 
expressed,  and  no  such  title  was  borne  by  London 
mayors  until  the  days  of  Richard  III.  The  mayor 
was  by  Edward's  charter  also  made  escheator  of  all 
lands,  chattels  and  hereditaments  within  the  city 
limits,  the  title  to  which  was  vitiated  by  forfeiture,  or 
for  other  causes.  Besides  this,  Southwark,  while  not 
actually  brought  into  the  city  limits  till  the  reign  of 
Edward  IV.,  was  nevertheless  brought  under  the 
authority  of  the  mayor  and  his  sheriffs,  the  village 


172  LONDON. 

being  made  over  to  the  city  as  a  fee  farm.  With  these 
concessions  to  the  city,  Edward  III.  commenced  a 
really  glorious  and  a  certainly  gorgeous  reign.  If 
there  are  no  records  of  riots  and  disturbances,  there 
are,  on  the  other  hand,  records  of  pageants,  ceremon- 
ials, tournaments  and  imposing  processions.  Plumed 
and  armored  knights  rode  the  streets,  and  heraldic 
banners  floated  from  the  windows.  It  was  an  age  of 
enterprise  and  great  results.  It  was  a  period  of  fight- 
ing and  feasting,  and  examples  of  the  lavish  expendi- 
ture of  the  times  exist  in  the  great  festivities  with 
which  Philippa  of  Hainault,  the  king's  youthful  bride, 
made  her  state  entry  into  London,  and  of  that  great 
tournament  which  was  held  in  the  Cheap,  when  the 
boy  king  and  his  bride  came  into  the  city  after  the 
birth  of  their  eldest  son.  Of  both  these  great  festiv- 
ities descriptions  have  been  preserved  to  us,  and  are 
a  splendid  and  detailed  record  of  the  pageantry  of 
the  times. 

Meanwhile  the  city  companies  grew  steadily  in 
power  and  influence.  P^dward  III.  was  most  liber- 
ally inclined  towards  them,  and  under  his  patronage 
the  work  of  incorporation  went  on  rapidly.  Xo  less 
than  eight  companies  had  obtained  charters  from  him 
before  the  close  of  the  reign.  Thus  the  Goldsmiths, 
the  Skinners,  the  Merchant  Tailors,  received  charters 
in  1327 — the  year  of  his  accession — the  Grocers  in 
1345,  the  Saddlers  in  1363,  the  Drapers  and  the  Fish- 
mongers in  1364,  wrhile  the  Founders  were  enrolled  in 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.       173 

1365,  though  their  actual  working  charter  was  only 
granted  them  by  James  I.  in  1614.  The  Haber- 
dashers had  already  been  given  official  recognition  in 
1311,  though  a  charter  was  not  accorded  them  until 
1447  by  Henry  VI.,  and  their  present  working  charter 
granted  them  by  Henry  VII.  in  1601.  The  Black- 
smiths were  recognized  in  1325,  though  subsequently 
united  with  the  Spurriers,  and  incorporated  as  such  by 
Queen  Elizabeth  in  1571,  and  re-incorporated  under 
Charles  I.  in  1639.  The  Ironmongers  were  also  first 
recognized  as  a  guild  under  Edward  III. — that  is,  in 
1330 — though  they  are  mentioned  in  an  ordinance 
regulating  the  trade  of  the  city  issued  as  early  as  the 
reign  of  Edward  I. 

It  must  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  the  granting 
of  charters  by  the  royal  executive  was  always  an  act 
of  enlightened  policy.  It  was,  in  fact,  frequently  a 
purely  business  transaction,  it  being  one  of  the 
methods  by  which  sovereigns  raised  money  for  the 
necessary  expenses  incurred  by  the  French  and  other 
foreign  wars.  On  the  other  hand,  monopoly,  and  the 
power  to  confine  and  regulate  trade,  were,  of  course, 
the  real  raison  d'etre  of  the  city  companies.  No  one 
who  was  not  a  member  of  a  particular  guild  could 
exercise  the  craft  over  which  that  guild  had  protectory 
rights,  either  in  London  or  Southwark.  To  secure 
this  membership,  such  person  was  compelled  to  serve 
a  seven  years'  apprenticeship.  In  return,  however, 
the  advantages  obtained  by  such  membership  were 


174  LONDON. 

well  worth  waiting  for.  He  was  then  secure  against 
competition,  for  the  official  head  and  rulers  of  each 
guild  decided  the  scale  of  prices.  He  was  also  secure 
from  over-grinding  work,  for  the  same  rulers  also 
settled  the  working  hours.  He  was  finally  secure 
against  underselling  by  unlawful  means,  and  inferior 
work,  for  the  same  rulers  exercised  the  prerogative  of 
examining  all  work  turned  out,  and  condemning  the 
unsuitable.  The  rules  of  each  company  were  drawn 
up  in  a  species  of  constitution,  which  was  solemnly 
confirmed  at  the  Guildhall,  and  incorporated  in  the 
royal  charters.  Any  disobedience  to  the  constitution 
of  the  company,  which  was  kept  in  the  company's 
craft-box,  and  read  once  a  year  to  the  assembled  mem- 
bers standing  bareheaded,  was  punished  by  severe 
fine,  and,  as  a  final  resort,  disgrace  and  expulsion. 
The  officers  of  the  company  were  elected  by  the  mem- 
bers themselves,  and  each  had  as  good  a  chance  as 
any  of  rising  to  official  rank.  Members  found  them- 
selves protected  from  persecution  or  injustice,  and,  if 
they  failed  in  life,  they  were  supported  by  their  breth- 
ren, and  interred  at  their  expense,  while  the  masses 
for  the  repose  of  their  souls  were  among  the  expenses 
also  defrayed  by  the  guild  of  which  they  were  mem- 
bers;  and  finally,  in  1284,  each  guild  was  represented 
by  a  certain  number  of  members  in  the  civic  parlia- 
ment. 

Indeed,  from  being   represented  bodies,  the  com- 
panies, during  the  reign  of  Richard  II.,  came  to  arro- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.       175 

gate  to  themselves  the  right  to  define,  as  it  were,  the 
city's  constitution,  and  gradually  possessed  themselves 
of  the  complete  control  of  the  municipal  machine. 
It  had  been  customary  for  each  ward  to  elect  its  own 
alderman,  and  four,  six  or  eight  of  its  inhabitants, 
according  to  the  size  of  the  ward,  to  be  members  of 
the  Common  Council.  A  royal  ordinance  issued  by 
Edward  III.  removed  the  power  of  nomination,  if 
not  of  actual  election,  from  the  wards,  and  gave  it  to 
the  companies;  and  it  naturally  followed  that  those 
who  were  nominated  by  the  companies  were  invariably 
elected  by  the  wards.  By  the  "  Charter  of  Maces  " 
(Edward  III.,  June  10,  1354) — the  same  by  which, 
though  not  expressed  therein,  it  is  held  that  the  mayor 
obtained  his  title  of  Lord  Mayor — the  king  directed 
that  the  aldermen,  whom  it  had  been  customary  to 
choose  annually,  should  be  permitted  to  retain  their 
offices  during  good  behavior,  while  Richard  II.,  in 
1394,  made  the  office  a  life  one,  and  fixed  the  tax  for 
refusing  to  serve  at  £500.  But  the  Common  Council 
had  also  been  made  to  undergo  a  change ;  for,  while 
it  had  always  been  customary  that  its  members  should 
number  forty,  in  1351,  by  the  25th  Edward  III.,  it 
was  enacted  that  fifty-four  councilmen  should  be 
elected,  while  in  1376  the  number  was  again  raised, 
this  time  to  one  hundred  and  fifty-six.  This  was 
presumably  when  the  "  Wards  Without "  were  in- 
cluded in  the  city  limits.  Again,  in  1383,  in  an 
ordinance  made  by  the  Lord  Mayor,  the  aldermen  and 


176  LONDON. 

the  commonalty  in  council  assembled,  it  was  decreed 
that  yearly,  on  St.  Gregory's  Day,  the  aldermen  should 
be  charged,  fifteen  days  after,  to  meet  and  select 
from  each  ward  four  to  become  common  councillors 
during  the  year  following.  This  brought  the  number 
to  two  hundred  and  six,  which  it  has  remained  to  this 
day.  As  the  aldermen  were,  as  we  have  seen,  elected 
on  the  nomination  of  the  companies,  and  they  in  turn 
chose  the  common  councillors,  it  may  be  easily  seen 
how  completely  the  companies  had  obtained  control 
of  the  civic  government.  Just  how  far  the  formation 
of  the  city  companies  influenced  the  division  of  the 
city  into  wards  it  is  difficult  to  say.  London  wards, 
exclusive  of  the  wards  without,  were  twenty-two  in 
number,  and  derived  their  names  principally  from  the 
adjoining  gates  or  public  places  situated  within  them. 
Thus,  following  the  line  of  London  Wall,  commenc- 
ing with  Tower  Ward,  which  was  that  contiguous  to 
the  Tower,  came  Aldgate  Ward,  Bishopsgate  Ward, 
Broad  Street  Ward,  Coleman  Street  Ward,  Bassishaw 
Ward,  Cripplegate  Ward,  Aldersgate  Ward,  Farring- 
don  Ward,  which  extended  from  Newgate  and  Lud- 
gate  to  the  Thames  ;  and  then,  following  the  north 
bank  of  the  river,  Castle  Baynard  Ward,  Queenhithe 
Ward,  Vintry  Ward,  Dowgate  Ward,  Bridge  Ward, 
Billingsgate  Ward,  which  was  thus  contiguous  to 
Tower  Ward.  In  the  centre  of  the  city  were  Lang- 
bourne  Ward,  Cornhill  Ward,  Cheap  Ward,  Bread 
Street  Ward  and  Cordwaiuers  Ward,  Walbrook  Ward 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   177 

and  Candlewick  Ward.  To  these  was  subsequently 
added  Lime  Street  Ward,  which  was  formed  out  of 
portions  of  Aldgate,  Bishopsgate,  Langbourne  and 
Cornhill  Wards. 

The  wards,  however,  only  attained  their  final  ar- 
rangement during  the  wardenship  of  Sir  Ralph  de 
Sandwich,  when  the  immediate  suburbs  came  also  to 
be  limited  by  ward  divisions.  In  some  cases  new 
names  were  accorded  to  these ;  in  others,  the  same  as 
that  of  the  ward  immediately  contiguous  "  within  " 
the  walls,  the  word  "  without "  being  added.  Thus, 
beyond  Aldgate  lay  Portsoken  Ward ;  beyond  Bishops- 
gate  Ward  Within  lay  Bishopsgate  Ward  Without. 
Coleman  Street  Ward  was  made  to  extend  over  the  city 
boundaries,  and  to  take  in  the  adjoining  space  without 
the  walls.  Beyond  Cripplegate  Ward  Within  was 
Cripplegate  Ward  Without,  and  beyond  Aldersgate 
Ward  AVithin  was  Aldersgate  Ward  Without,  while 
Farringdon  Ward  Without,  which  adjoined  Farring- 
don  Ward  Within,  included  the  whole  district  beyond 
Newgate  and  Ludgate,  which  comprised  the  White- 
friars,  the  Temple,  St.  Bride's,  St.  Dunstan's,  as  far  as 
St.  Clement  Danes.  This  was  the  most  important  of 
the  extra-mural  wards,  as  it  was  traversed  by  the 
Fleet  Street,  which  had  become  the  most  direct  route 
l>etween  the  city  and  the  king's  palace  at  Westminster. 
Later,  under  Edward  VI.,  another  ward  was  added, 
this  one  across  the  river,  on  the  Southwark  side, 
Bridge  Ward  Without. 
VOL.  I.— 12 


178  LONDON. 

Though,  as  we  have  seen,  the  larger  proportion  of 
the  wards  derived  their  names  from  the  adjoining 
gates  or  public  places  situated  near  them,  yet  some 
did  so  distinctly  from  the  trade  guilds,  now  city  com- 
panies, which  had  their  headquarters  within  their 
limits.  Thus  the  Vintners,  the  Bakers,  the  Cord- 
waiuers  and  the  Candlewickers  gave  their  names  to 
the  wards  which  were  so  called.  With  the  rise  of  the 
companies  into  a  position  of  such  dominant  power, 
they  were  no  longer  satisfied  with  holding  their  meet- 
ings in  the  General  Guildhall,  or  in  hired  halls  rented 
for  the  purpose.  Several  of  the  great  companies  de- 
termined therefore  to  erect  their  own  places  of  assem- 
bly, and  spacious  so-called  " halls"  arose  in  different 
parts  of  the  city,  the  companies  vicing  with  each  other 
in  the  proportions  of  their  halls  and  the  splendor  of 
their  interior  decorations. 

The  Me  reel's,  who  had  been  dislodged  by  extensive 
alterations  and  enlargements  made  to  the  Hospital  of 
St.  Thomas  of  Aeon,  now  crossed  to  the  other  side  of 
the  Cheap,  and  there  erected  a  hall,  which  remained 
their  headquarters  until  the  dissolution  of  the  religious 
houses,  when  they  obtained  from  Henry  VIII.  a 
grant  of  their  old  premises.  The  Skinners  purchased 
from  the  king  a  house  which  had  once  been  their 
headquarters,  but  in  one  of  the  civic  revolutions  had 
passed  into  private  hands.  After  the  split  in  the 
Weavers'  Guild,  the  Drapers  were  for  some  time,  as 
it  were,  without  a  home,  but  seemed  to  have  had 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLAXTAGENETS.       179 

headquarters  at  St.  Mary  Boathatch,  a  sort  of  lock 
gate  or  dock  on  the  Walbrook  at  St.  Mary  Woolen- 
Lithe,  and  also  in  Broad  Street.  They  soon  migrated, 
however,  to  Coruhill,  and  from  there  to  St.  Swithiu's 
Lane,  where  they  remained  until  1541,  when  they 
moved  to  their  present  quarters  in  Throgmortou 
Street.  The  Merchant  Tailors,  on  the  other  hand, 
after  they  had  severed  their  relations  with  the  Weav- 
ers, established  their  headquarters  in  Cordwainers 
Ward,  subsequently  purchasing  the  ground  and  house, 
which  are,  with  large  alterations,  still  their  present 
headquarters,  in  the  lane  to  which  their  trade  gives 
the  name  of  Threadneedle  Street.  The  Saddlers  ap- 
pear to  have  been  connected  from  the  very  earliest 
times  with  St.  Martiu-le-Grand,  and  to  have  par- 
taken more  of  a  religious  than  of  a  mercantile  charac- 
ter; while  the  Bakers  and  the  Cordwainers  had  halls 
in  Bread  Street  and  Cordwainers  Ward  respectively. 
In  some  instances  the  residences  of  the  old  city  fami- 
lies were  found  suitable  for  the  purposes  intended, 
and  thus  the  mansions  of  the  Basings,  the  Bukerels 
and  the  Lovekyns  were  transformed  into  guildhalls 
and  assembly-rooms  by  the  different  city  companies. 
Thus  the  house  of  Sir  Nicholas  de  Segrave,  whose 
brother  had  been  bishop  during  the  reign  of  Edward 
III.,  became  the  house  of  the  Goldsmiths,  who  had, 
however,  from  the  earliest  time  had  their  meeting- 
place  or  guild  hall  in  Aldersgate  Ward  ;  while  the 
mansion  of  Edward  Crepin,  in  Cornhill,  was  that 


180  LONDON. 

which  was  acquired  by  the  Merchant  Tailors,  who 
added  to  it  the  adjoining  property  of  the  Outwich 
family,  and  there  erected  Merchant  Tailors'  Hall. 

If  similarity  of  craft  was  the  basic  foundation  of 
the  city  companies,  there  was,  however,  one  guild 
which  had  nationality  as  its  basic  property.  This 
was  the  German  Guild,  which  included  the  greater 
projwrtion  of  the  handicraftsmen  of  that  nationality. 
They  kept  themselves  near  the  river  bank,  where 
they  owned  a  hall  or  place  of  meeting  in  that  part 
of  the  city  to  the  west  of  London  Bridge  arid  to  the 
east  of  Castle  Baynard,  and  therefore  between  the 
two,  which  bore  the  name  of  Steelyard.  While  based  on 
the  matter  of  nationality,  yet  there  was  much  in  this 
guild  that  was  religious.  The  members  lived  celibate 
and  ascetic  lives,  apart  from  their  fellow-citizens,  and 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they  nurtured  the  love 
of  the  Fatherland  until  it  became  almost  a  religious 
mania,  and  that  their  one  ambition  was  to  return  to 
their  native  country  as  soon  as  means  and  circum- 
stances permitted. 

If  the  power  of  the  companies  was  vast  at  this 
time  and  attained  formidable  proportions  under  the 
Plantagenets,  the  influence  of  the  Church  upon  the 
London  of  that  day  was  of  equal  importance.  The 
Bishop  of  London  had  in  the  days  of  Mellitus  and 
Erkenwald  been  a  very  influential  personage,  and  had 
retained  much  of  his  influence,  in  civil  as  well  as 
religious  matters,  to  the  days  to  which  we  are  refer- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   181 

ring.  St.  Paul's  was  of  course  the  principal  church 
of  the  city,  and  the  bishop's  church  as  well.  It  had, 
as  we  have  seen,  suffered  greatly  from  the  fire  of 
1087,  but  almost  immediately  work  was  started  ou  a 
new  edifice  to  take  the  place  of  the  one  injured.  It 
was  determined  that  the  new  church  should  be  of 
stone,  and  as  the  fire  had  occurred  just  before  the 
death  of  the  Conqueror,  he  had  himself  directed  that 
the  stones  of  the  ruined  Palatine  Tower,  which  stood 
by  the  Fleet,  where  Blackfriars  afterwards  was  situ- 
ated, should  be  used  in  the  construction.  This  was 
his  contribution  to  the  building  of  the  new  church. 
Work,  however,  proceeded  slowly,  and  the  church 
was  far  from  finished  when  it  was  again  seriously 
damaged  by  fire  in  1136.  The  work  was  resumed, 
however,  after  some  time;  but  this  time  on  a  far 
more  extensive  scale.  The  spire  is  said  to  have  been 
completed  in  1221,  and  the  choir  finished  in  1240. 
It  was  lengthened  eastward  in  1255,  and  reported  as 
"nearly  completed"  in  1283.  It  had  thus  taken 
some  two  hundred  years  to  build,  and  presented  a 
singular  architectural  melange,  furnishing  examples 
of  the  Norman,  Early  English  and  the  Decorated 
Schools.  Indeed,  subsequent  additions  and  repairs 
carry  it  through  the  whole  period  of  the  Decorated 
and  Perpendicular  Schools.  But  those  portions  exe- 
cuted in  this  style  were  unimportant.  It  possessed 
a  great  central  tower,  and  at  the  west  end  two  mas- 
sive bell-towers,  which  probably  gave  Wren  his  idea 


182  LONDON. 

when  the  church  was  finally  rebuilt,  after  the  great 
fire  of  1666.  The  church  is  said  to  have  been  five 
hundred  and  ninety-six  feet  in  length,  one  hundred 
and  four  feet  in  breadth,  and  one  hundred  and  thirty 
feet  from  the  base  to  the  cornice  of  the  roof,  while 
possessing  an  interior  height  of  ninety-three  feet. 
The  length  of  the  choir  is  given  as  one  hundred  and 
five  feet,  and  the  height  of  the  tower  as  two  hundred 
and  eighty-five  feet,  and  the  height  of  the  spire  two 
hundred  and  eight  feet.  There  was  a  chapel  at  the 
east  end  dedicated  to  St.  Mary  the  Virgin,  with  one 
to  the  north  of  it  dedicated  to  St.  George,  and  one  to 
the  south  dedicated  to  St.  Dunstan.  The  nave  is 
described  as  having  had  twelve  bays,  and  as  being 
"very  long"  and  "very  noble,"  and  the  central  tower 
seems  to  have  been  quite  hollow,  like  a  lantern,  in- 
ternally. The  windows  of  the  nave  are  said  to  have 
been  very  high  and  long,  while  a  rich  circular  window 
gave  light  to  the  east  end.  The  church  contained  a 
number  of  monuments.  In  the  middle  aisle  of  the 
nave,  to  the  right,  was  that  of  Sir  John  Beauchamp, 
constable  of  Dover  Castle  (died  1358),  which  tomb 
was  commonly  called  "Duke  Humphrey's  tomb."  St. 
Dunstan's  Chapel  contained  that  of  Henry  de  Lacy, 
Earl  of  Lincoln ;  while  on  the  north  side  of  the  choir 
was  that  of  John  of  Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lancaster,  (died 
1399).  Later  Sir  Christopher  Hatton  was  here  in- 
terred, and  a  sumptuous  monument  erected  over  his 
grave;  while  Sir  Philip  Sydney,  and  his  father-in- 


St.  Paul's  Cathedral 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   183 

law,  Sir  Francis  Walsingham,  were  also  here  com- 
memorated/  each  by  an  unpretending  tablet. 

Adjoining  the  church  was  the  chapter  house,  com- 
pleted in  1332,  and  to  the  northwest  corner  of  the 
churchyard  stood  the  Episcopal  Palace.  At  the 
northeast  end  of  the  church,  "  about  the  middle  of  the 
churchyard,"  stood  the  famous  Cross  of  St.  Paul's, 
and  here  sermons  were  frequently,  and  political 
speeches  occasionally,  delivered.  The  churchyard  was 
itself  surrounded  by  a  stone  wall,  for  entrance  to 
which  there  were  six  gate  houses. 

The  parishes  were  in  many  ways  divisions  of  the 
city  quite  equal  in  importance  to  the  wards,  but  inde- 
pendent of  them.  Nor  can  it  be  said  that  each  ward 
was  divided  into  so  many  parishes,  for  the  divisions 
in  no  way  corresponded ;  the  parishes  in  many  cases 
overlapped  from  one  ward  to  another.  Roughly  speak- 
ing, however,  it  is  customary  to  refer  to  a  parish  as 
being  in  that  ward  in  which  the  greater  part  of  the 
area  which  it  comprises  is  situated,  and  in  which  the 
parish  church  itself  actually  stands;  thus,  Tower 
Ward,  Aldersgate  Within,  Vintry,  Bridge  Ward 
Within,  and  Bread  Street  Ward,  may  be  said  to  have 
come  to  comprise  each  four  parishes ;  while  the  wards 
of  Aldgate,  Coleman  Street  and  Cordwainers  Ward 
came  each  to  be  divided  into  three.  Bishopsgate 
Ward  Within,  like  Dowgate  and  Cornhill,  came  to 
have  only  two  parishes;  but  Broad  Street  Ward, 
Cripplegate  Ward  Within,  Castle  Baynard,  Walbrook 


184  LONDON. 

and  Candlewick  Wards  came  to  be  each  under  five 
parochial  jurisdictions.  Three  wards — Farringdon 
"Ward  Within,  Queenhithe  and  Cheap — came  to  in- 
clude each  no  less  than  seven  parishes ;  two  wards — 
those  of  Billingsgate  and  Langbourne — to  have  six 
each,  while  one  parish  covered  the  whole  ward  of 
Bassishaw.  It  was  not  long,  however,  as  has  been 
said,  before  the  extra-mural  sites  in  the  immediate 
vicinity  of  the  city  wall  were  brought  within  the 
city's  jurisdiction,  and  divided  likewise  into  wards. 
These  were  parochially  disciplined  after  the  same 
fashion,  though  entirely  independent  of  the  city 
parishes.  All  these  parochial  divisions  remain  prac- 
tically unchanged  to-day,  with  a  very  few  alterations ; 
for  when  in  the  reconstruction,  which  was  effected  after 
the  great  fire  of  1660,  some  of  the  churches  were  not 
rebuilt,  their  parochial  administration  was  simply 
given  over  to  the  authorities  of  the  neighboring 
parish,  and  they  were,  as  it  were,  "joined  "  thereto, 
but  their  ecclesiastical  existence  and  territorial  limita- 
tions were  held  to  continue  to  exist  in  theory. 

Where  a  parish  had  grown  into  proportions  too 
formidable  for  satisfactory  administration,  it  was,  in 
many  cases,  divided  up  iuto  a  number  of  private 
chantries,  each  having  parochial  jurisdiction,  and 
which  came  therefore,  roughly  speaking,  to  be  enu- 
merated with  the  parishes  themselves.  In  some  cases 
each  division  retained  the  name  of  the  mother  parish, 
but  to  distinguish  it,  an  affix  wras  thereunto  appended. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.       185 

Thus  it  is  that  we  find  in  several  instances  a  number 
of  churches  in  close  proximity  to  one  another,  each 
dedicated  to  the  same  saint.  Thus  in  Queenhithe 
there  came  to  be  the  parishes  of  St.  Mary  Mounthaw 
and  St.  Mary  Somerset,  while  in  the  adjoining  Castle 
Baynard  Ward  was  that  of  St.  Mary  Magdalen,  each 
having  formed  originally  part  of  the  same  parish ; 
while  Cordwainers  Ward  came  to  contain  the  parishes 
of  St.  Mary  le  Bow  and  St.  Mary  Aldermary,  the 
last  mentioned  of  which  was  in  all  probability,  as  its 
name  indicates,  the  oldest  of  all.  Thus  also  two 
parishes  in  Queenhithe  came  to  be  dedicated  to  Saint 
Nicholas,  with  the  difference  that  one  came  to  be  called 
St.  Nicholas  (Olave),  and  the  other  St.  Nicholas  (Cole 
Abbey).  Of  what  had  been  originally  the  great 
parish  of  St.  Katherine,  which  had  extended  over 
the  greater  part  of  Aldgate  and  Portsoken  Wards, 
there  came  to  be  the  parishes  of  St.  Katherine  by  the 
Tower,  St.  Katherine  Cree  and  St.  Katheriue  Cole- 
man. 

In  reconstructing  a  picture  of  London  of  the  Plan- 
tagenet  days  the  churches  must  indeed  hold  a  very 
prominent  place,  not  so  much  perhaps  for  their  beauty 
as  for  their  number.  The  terrible  visitation  of  the 
plague  of  1350  had  had  the  effect  of  greatly  increas- 
ing the  religious  foundations.  Every  mourner,  and 
there  were  naturally  many,  had  seemed  to  feel  their 
grief  assuaged,  or  the  chance  of  eternal  happiness  for 
those  for  whom  they  mourned  enhanced,  by  the  dona- 


186  LONDON. 

tion  of  large  sums  for  the  erection  of  church  edifices. 
Unfortunately  these  donations  did  not  stipulate  in  the 
matter  of  church  architecture,  and  the  new  edifices 
Avere  therefore  as  plain  and  inartistic  in  appearance  as 
those  that  had  been  built  before.  There  were,  of 
course,  some  noted  exceptions,  but  they  were  few  and 
far  between. 

That  the  Londoners  had  been  frequently  character- 
ized as  pious  is  no  surprise  to  us,  when  we  learn  that 
in  later  Plautagenet  days  they  already  possessed  one 
hundred  and  fourteen  churches,  besides  twelve  public 
chapels  belonging  to  monastic  foundations  and  other 
such  institutions.  In  fact,  two-thirds  of  the  area  of 
London  was  covered  by  churches,  parochial  or  other- 
wise, abbeys,  priories,  monasteries,  nunneries,  friaries 
and  convents.  Of  these  one  hundred  and  fourteen 
churches,  ninety-five  were  situated  within  the  walls, 
while  the  remainder  were  in  the  wards  without.  Of 
these  ninety-five  churches,  nineteen — namely,  All 
Hallows  Barking,  St.  Dunstan  in  the  East,  St.  Andrew 
Undershaft,  St.  ^thelburgha,  St.  Peter  by  the  Cross 
(West  Cheap),  St.  Mary  Magdalen  (Old  Fish  Street), 
St.  Gregory  by  St.  Paul's,  St.  Faith  near  St.  Paul's, 
St.  Peter  (Paul's  Wharf),  St.  Mary  Somerset,  Holy 
Trinity  the  Less,  St.  Magnus  the  Martyr,  St.  Botolph 
by  the  Bridge,  St.  Botolph  (Botolph  Lane),  St.  Peter 
upon  Cornhill,  St.  Michael  upon  Cornhill,  St.  Stephen 
(Walbrook),  St.  Mary  Bothaw,  St.  Swithin  (London 
Stone) — were  Saxon  foundations ;  four — namely,  St. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   187 

Olave  (Hart  Street),  St.  Olave  (Jewry),  St.  Olave 
(Silver  Street),  and  St.  Edmund  the  King  and  Martyr 
— were  Danish  foundations ;  while  two — namely,  Great 
St.  Helen's  and  St.  Mary  Aldermary,  though  in  reality 
Norman  foundations — were  actually  Plantagenet  edi- 
fices, as  fire  and  divers  damage  had  brought  about  a 
reconstruction  of  them  in  Plantagenet  times. 

Of  the  remaining  sixty-nine  churches,  fourteen — 
namely,  St.  Katherine  Cree,  in  the  ward  of  Aldgate ; 
St.  Martin  Outwich,  in  Broad  Street  Ward  ;  St.  Alban 
(Wood  Street),  St.  Mary  Magdalen  (Milk  Street),  in 
Cripplegate  Within ;  St.  Augustin  (Watliug  Street) 
and  St.  Matthew  (Friday  Street),  in  Farringdou  Ward 
Within ;  St.  James  (Garlickhithe)  and  St.  Michael 
(Paternoster  Royal),  in  the  ward  of  Vintry ;  All  Hal- 
lows the  Great,  in  Dowgate  Ward ;  St.  Mary  Cole- 
church,  St.  Lawrence  (Jewry)  and  All  Hallows 
(Honey  Lane),  in  Cheap,  and  St.  Mary  le  Bow  and 
St.  Antholin,  in  Cordwainers  Ward — were  Plantagenet 
foundations,  and  belong  more  especially  to  the  period 
whereof  this  chapter  is  intended  to  treat ;  while  other 
notable  churches  which  shortly  after  sprang  into  exist- 
ence and  obtained  no  small  degree  of  historic  import- 
ance were  those  of  St.  Benet  Fink,  St.  Bartholomew 
by  the  Exchange,  and  St.  Christopher  le  Stocks,  all 
three:  in  Broad  Street  Ward ;  St.  Stephen,  in  Coleman 
Street  Ward ;  St.  Mary  (Aldermanbury),  and  St. 
Michael  (Wood  Street),  in  Cripplegate  Ward  Within ; 
St.  Mary  Staining,  Sts.  Anne  and  Agnes,  in  Alders- 


188  LONDON. 

gate  Ward  Within ;  St.  Martin  (Ludgate),  St.  Michael 
le  Quern,  and  St.  Vedast  (Foster  Lane),  in  Farriugdou 
Ward  Within  ;  St.  Andrew  by  the  Wardrobe,  in  Castle 
Baynard  Ward ;  St.  Michael,  in  the  ward  of  Queen- 
hithe;  St.  Martin,  in  the  ward  of  Yintry  ;  All  Hallows 
the  Great,  in  Dowgate  Ward ;  St.  Beuet  (Gracechurch 
Street),  in  Bridge  Ward  Within ;  St.  Margaret  (New 
Fish  Street)  and  St.  Margaret  Pattens,  in  the  ward  of 
Billingsgate ;  St.  Gabriel  (Fenchurch  Street),  All  Hal- 
lows (Lombard  Street)  and  St.  Mary  Woolnoth,  in 
Langbourne  Ward ;  St.  Mildred  (Poultry),  St.  Martin 
Pomary  and  St.  Benet  Sherehog,  in  the  ward  of 
Cheap  ;  All  Hallows,  in  Bread  Street  Ward  ;  St.  Mary 
(Woolchurch  Haw),  in  Walbrook  Ward ;  and  St. 
Clement  (East  Cheap)  and  St.  Michael  (Crooked  Lane), 
in  Candlewick  Ward. 

Of  all  these  churches,  so  famous  in  name  and  so 
important  in  the  study  of  London  history,  only  four 
remain — namely,  All  Hallows  Barking,  St.  Clave 
(Hart  Street),  St.  ^Ethelburgha  and  Great  St.  Helen's 
— which  vie  with  St.  Bartholomew  the  Great  and  St. 
Giles  (Cripplegate)  in  age  and  historic  interest.  Two 
— namely,  St.  Andrew  Undershaft  and  St.  Katherine 
Cree — having  become  in  a  bad  state  of  disrepair,  had 
to  be  rebuilt,  the  former  in  1520-1522,  the  latter  in 
1630—1032;  and  so,  though  they  subsequently  escaped 
the  great  fire,  and  are,  in  that,  more  ancient  than  any 
other  of  the  existing  London  churches,  yet  they  can- 
not rank  in  age  or  interest  with  the  first  four  men- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANT AGENETS.       189 

tioned.  Six  others  escaped  the  great  fire;  but  of 
these,  five — namely,  St.  Katheriiie  Colemau,  in  Aid- 
gate  Ward,  and  St.  Peter  le  Poer,  St.  Christopher  le 
Stocks,  St.  Martin  Outwich  and  All  Hallows  in  the 
Wall,  all  four  in  Broad  Street  Ward — fell  into  such  a 
sorry  state  that  they  had  to  be  rebuilt;  and  of  these 
five,  the  last  two  had  to  be  subsequently  taken  down 
to  make  way  for  city  improvements;  while  one,  All 
Hallows  Staining,  in  Tower  Ward,  came  to  be  in  such 
a  dangerous  condition  that  it  actually  fell  down,  and 
the  remaining  walls  were  pulled  down  in  1761. 
Eighty-five  churches  perished  in  the  flames  of  1666. 
Of  these,  forty-eight  only  were  rebuilt,  and  ten  of 
these  were  eventually  pulled  down  to  make  way  for 
city  improvements,  while  the  remaining  thirty-seven 
were  never  rebuilt. 

Of  the  four  intra-mural  churches  that  have  come 
down  to  us,  at  least  in  part — for  St.  Bartholomew 
the  Great  and  St.  Giles  (Cripplegate),  being  extra- 
mural churches,  are  not  included  in  the  present  list — 
All  Hallows  Barking  and  St.  ./Ethelburgha,  being 
Saxon  foundations,  have  already  been  spoken  of  in 
that  connection;  while  St.  Olave  (Hart  Street)  has 
been  spoken  of  in  connection  with  the  Danish  period. 
There  remains  therefore  of  which  to  treat  only  Great 
St.  Helen's,  so  often  called  the  "Westminster  of  the 
City,"  because  of  the  number  and  interest  of  the 
tombs  and  monuments  contained  therein.  Though, 
as  has  been  said,  really  a  Norman  foundation,  the 


190  LONDON. 

church  was  rebuilt  in  1212,  and  again  enlarged  and 
improved  in  1308,  through  the  munificence  of  one 
William  Basing,  sheriff  of  London,  who  added  largely 
to  its  endowments.  The  church  came  to  be  connected 
with  the  adjoining  Convent  of  the  Nuns  of  St.  Helen, 
and  in  this  differed  from  other  conventual  churches 
also  serving  parochial  purposes,  they  having  been  first 
conventual,  and  only  converted  to  parochial  uses  at 
the  tune  of  the  dissolution  of  the  religious  houses, 
while  St.  Helen's  was  first  parochial  and  then  con- 
ventual. After  the  dissolution  of  the  religious  houses, 
the  partition  between  that  part  which  was  used  by  the 
nuns  and  that  part  which  served  the  parish  was  taken 
down,  and  the  whole  church  once  more  turned  over  to 
parochial  uses.  Having  fallen  into  decided  dilapida- 
tion, it  was  repaired  and  put  in  order  in  the  fifteenth 
century ;  but  the  greater  part  of  the  original  building 
is  still  preserved  to  us,  and  is  much  as  it  was  in  Plan- 
tageuet  days.  The  interest  in  the  church  not  only 
arises  from  its  historical  associations,  but  also  from  its 
architectural  peculiarity  of  construction;  for,  owing 
to  the  double  purpose  which  it  was  intended  to  serve, 
it  was  built  with  a  double  nave,  parallel  to  each 
other  and  of  equal  length,  though  differing  somewhat 
in  breadth.  The  high  altar  was  in  line  with  the 
parish  nave,  but  a  wide  opening  permitted  the  nuns 
to  follow  the  services  from  their  side  of  the  church ; 
and  near  the  east  end  of  the  north  wall  were  two 
hagioscopes,  through  which  the  nuns  might  also  view 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   191 

the  high  altar  from  the  cloister  and  the  refectory. 
The  monuments  in  the  church  are  both  old  and  inter- 
esting. The  most  ancient  is  that  of  Thomas  Langtou, 
chaplain  (died  1350),  who  is  buried  in  the  choir. 
Among  others  of  great  interest  is  that  of  Sir  John 
Crosby,  alderman,  the  founder  of  Crosby  Hall,  who 
died  in  1475,  and  of  his  wife  Ann ;  an  altar  tomb, 
with  two  recumbent  figures,  that  of  Sir  Thomas  Gre- 
sham,  the  founder  of  the  Royal  Exchange  (died  1579) : 
an  altar  tomb,  with  short  inscriptions,  that  of  Sir 
William  Pickering  (died  1542),  and  of  his  son  (died 
1547);  that  of  Sir  Andrew  Judd,  lord  mayor  and 
founder  of  the  Free  Grammar  School  at  Tuubridge 
(died  1558);  that  of  Sir  John  Spencer,  "rich  Spen- 
cer," as  he  was  called,  and  from  whom  the  Marquis 
of  Northampton  derives  the  Spencer  portion  of  his 
name;  and  that  of  Lord  Mayor  Compton  (died  1594). 
It  is  also  interesting  to  know  that  William  Shakes- 
peare was  in  1598  a  member  of  St.  Helen's  parish. 
A  window  has  recently  been  erected  in  commemoration 
of  the  fact. 

The  church  of  St.  Mary-at-Hill,  also  sometimes 
spoken  of  as  an  extant  Plantagcnet  foundation,  while  it 
was  not  completely  destroyed  in  the  great  fire  of  1666, 
yet  was  so  much  damaged  that  the  repairs,  executed 
under  Sir  Christopher  Wren  in  1670,  or  thereabouts, 
entirely  altered  its  external  appearance ;  and  the  ex- 
tensive internal  alterations,  executed  in  1848-1849, 
so  changed  it  that  it  can  scarcely  be  counted,  with  St. 


192  LONDON. 

Helen's,  as  one  of  the  churches  of  the  Plantagenet 
period  still  extant.  Such  is  not  the  case  with  St. 
Giles  (Cripplegate),  for  this  ancient  church  shares 
honors  with  St.  Helen's,  and  is  much,  as  it  was  when 
erected  about  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century ; 
for  the  old  Norman  church,  of  which  Alfune,  who 
subsequently  became  the  first  hospitaller  of  St.  Bar- 
tholomew's Hospital,  was  the  founder,  had  fallen  into 
great  disrepair,  and  the  present  edifice  was  erected  on 
the  site.  It  is  of  the  late  perpendicular  period,  and 
has  many  good  details,  including  a  nave,  chancel  and 
aisles  divided  by  clustered  columns,  and  a  pulpit 
screen  and  font,  which  are  the  work  of  Grinling  Gib- 
bons. Besides  its  antiquity,  the  church  is  interesting 
as  the  last  resting-place  of  John  Fox,  the  martyrolo- 
gist  (died  1587),  and  of  John  Milton  (died  1674). 
In  1790,  however,  the  grave  of  the  great  poet  Avas 
disturbed,  and  a  number  of  "  indecent  liberties  taken 
with  his  remains."  The  present  monument,  erected 
in  his  honor,  was  put  up  in  1793,  at  the  expense  of 
Mr.  Samuel  Whitbread,  the  founder  of  the  great 
brewery,  who  was  a  profound  admirer  of  Milton. 
Daniel  Defoe,  who  died  in  the  parish,  was  formerly 
supposed  to  have  been  buried  here,  but  he  lies  in  Tin- 
dall's  burying-ground,  Bunhill  Fields.  The  registers 
have  been  carefully  kept,  and  show,  under  the  date 
July  27,  1623,  that  Ben  Jonson,  the  dramatist,  was 
married  here  to  Hester  Hopkins  on  that  day. 

As  has  been  said,  London  was  conspicuous  more 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   193 

perhaps  for  the  number  of  its  churches  than  for  their 
beauty.  To  classify  all  these  churches  would  be  im- 
possible ;  some  might,  of  course,  have  been  ascribed 
to  various  periods,  but  they  were  often  quite  incongru- 
ous in  their  various  component  parts.  Some,  like  St. 
Paul's,  had  vaulted  roof,  and  reared  their  spires 
proudly  aloft ;  others  had  low,  flat  roofs,  supported 
by  long  aisles  of  short  columns.  The  vaulted  roof 
was,  in  fact,  still  the  exception. 

The  number  of  churches  was,  if  not  surpassed, 
almost  equalled  by  that  of  religious  establishments. 
As  we  have  already  seen,  the  Benedictines  had  splen- 
did establishments  at  Westminster  and  Bermondsey, 
while  the  Augustinian  Canons  were  established  at  St. 
Bartholomew  (Smithfield)  and  at  St.  Mary  Overies 
(Southwark).  Within  the  walls,  or  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  the  city,  the  Dominicans  (Blackfriars),  the 
Franciscans  (Greyfriars)  and  the  Carmelites  (White- 
friars)  had  imposing  foundations,  great  barrack-like 
buildings,  to  be  sure,  but  spacious  and  orderly  ;  while 
the  Augustinian  Friars  at  Aldgate,  and  the  Carthu- 
sians on  the  Cheap,  were  also  liberally  established. 
Thus  it  may  be  seen  that  the  monks  and  regular 
canons  had  sought  the  more  secluded  and  distant  sites, 
where  they  could  pursue  their  studies  in  uninterrupted 
seclusion,  while  the  friars,  and  other  brethren  whose 
work  was  among  the  people,  had  selected  sites  in  the 
midst  of,  or  nearer  anyway  to  the  turmoil  of  the  city's 
life.  Other  establishments  now  arose,  and  the  next 
VOL.  I.— 13 


194  LONDON. 

of  the  great  religious  orders  to  seek  a  footing  in  Lon- 
don was  the  illustrious  Order  of  Citeaux.     The  Cis- 
tercians  made   their   appearance   in    England   about 
1349,  at  the  time  of  the  great  pestilence.     Edward 
III.  granted  them  laud  to  the  east  of  East  Sniithfield, 
beyond  Tower  Hill,  where  they  erected  the  far-famed 
abbey  of  St.  Mary  of  the  Graces.     To  distinguish  it 
from  Westminster,  which  was  beyond  London  on  the 
west  side,  it  was  termed  East  Minster,  and  continued 
to  be  known  as  such  until  the  dissolution  of  the  re- 
ligious houses  under  Henry  VIII.  caused  it  to  pass 
into  that  historical  oblivion   which,  from  that  time, 
enveloped  so  many  great  ecclesiastical  establishments. 
The  great  pestilence  was  also  instrumental  in  creating 
a    demand    for    another    foundation,    and    in    1371, 
through  the  munificence  of  one  Sir  Walter  de  Manny, 
K.    G.,   the    Carthusians    were    established    beyond 
Aldersgate,  somewhat  to  the  northeast  of  Sniithfield 
and  to  the  southeast  of  Clerkenwell,   and  the  new 
priory,  which  was  erected  in  the  midst  of  a  pesthouse 
field,  that  the  Carthusians  might  the  more  promptly 
attend  both  the  dying  and  the  dead,  came  to  be  known 
as   the    House  of  the    Salutation   of  the   Venerable 
Mother  of  God.     Indeed,  the  suburbs  were  quite  as 
crowded   with    religious   establishments   as    the   city 
itself.     It  may  be  said  that  Middlesex  was  then  en- 
joying what  may  be  termed  the  period  of  convents 
and  cloisters,  which  was  later  to  give  way  to  that  of 
parks  and  palaces.     The  religious  houses  were,  how- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   195 

ever,  a  great  benefit  to  the  community.  They  were 
splendid  examples  of  order  and  discipline,  and  seats 
of  learning  and  wisdom ;  and  besides  their  political 
and  economic  value,  their  aesthetic  value  must  also  be 
considered  great.  They  were  better  examples  of  archi- 
tecture than  then  usually  existed,  and  their  gardens 
were  indeed  things  of  peace  and  beauty.  Contempo- 
raneous historians  are,  in  fact,  rapturous  over  these 
gardens,  with  their  beautiful  shaded  walks,  at  the 
comers  of  which  religious  shrines  inspired  even  the 
most  sensuous  with  pious  awe. 

As  we  have  already  seen,  the  ecclesiastical  estab- 
lishments were  by  no  means  confined  to  the  purely 
monastic  foundations,  for  those  military  monks,  the 
Knights  of  St.  John  and  the  Knights  Templar,  had 
very  splendid  foundations  at  Clerkenwell  and  near  the 
Fleet.  The  last  mentioned  was,  in  fact,  as  it  proved, 
altogether  too  splendid  for  their  own  welfare.  In- 
deed, the  wealth  and  arrogance  of  the  order  through- 
out Europe  aroused  considerable  envy  and  jealousy, 
and  led  finally  to  its  dissolution  by  Pope  Clement  V., 
at  the  request  of  Philip  le  Bel,  King  of  France, 
whereupon  the  property  of  the  order  in  that  country 
was  either  granted  to  the  Knights  of  St.  John  or  con- 
fiscated to  the  crown.  This  example  Edward  II.  was 
not  reluctant  to  follow,  and  in  1313  the  order  was 
formally  abolished  in  England.  On  the  downfall  of 
the  Templars,  the  Temple  itself  was  bestowed  by  Ed- 
ward II.  on  Aymer  de  Valence,  Earl  of  Pembroke. 


196  LONDON. 

Following  the  French  precedent,  the  property,  on  the 
death  of  the  Earl  of  Pembroke,  passed  into  the  hands 
of  the  Knights  of  St.  John,  by  whom  the  Inner  and 
Middle  Temples  were  leased  to  the  students  of  the 
Common  Law,  and  the  Outer  Temple  to  Walter 
Stapleton,  Bishop  of  Exeter  and  Lord  Treasurer,  who 
was  beheaded  in  1326  ;  nor  did  the  dissolution  of  the 
religious  houses  under  Henry  VIII.  alter  this  ar- 
rangement, at  least  as  regards  the  Inner  and  Middle 
Temple,  for  the  students  of  the  two  Inns  of  Court  re- 
mained tenants  of  the  crown  until  1608,  in  which 
year  James  I.  conferred,  by  letters  patent,  both  the 
Inner  and  Middle  Temple  on  the  benchers  of  the  two 
societies  and  their  successors  forever. 

While  the  Inner  Temple  suffered  considerably  in 
the  great  fire  of  1666,  the  Middle  Temple  escaped 
almost  uninjured.  The  great  hall  of  the  Middle 
Temple  is  still  in  a  great  measure,  therefore,  what  it 
was  in  the  days  of  its  construction  (1572),  while 
Plowden,  the  well-known  jurist,  was  treasurer  of  the 
society,  and  it  is  one  of  the  finest  specimens  of  Eliza- 
bethan architecture  that  we  possess.  In  the  furthest 
end  is  the  original  of  Vandyke's  portrait  of  Charles 
I.,  of  which  copies  are  to  be  found  at  Windsor  and 
at  Hampton  Court.  The  Middle  Temple  also  pos- 
sesses a  splendid  library.  The  present  library  is, 
however,  quite  modern,  and  was  opened  by  the  Prince 
of  Wales  in  1861.  The  hall  of  the  Inner  Temple  is, 
for  the  same  reason,  devoid  of  historic  interest,  for 


Middle  Temple,  Hall 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLAN  TAG  EN  ETS.       197 

the  old  hall,  which  had  been  restored  in  1816,  being 
found  inadequate,  the  present  one  was  erected  in  1869 
from  designs  of  Mr.  Sydney  Smirke,  R.  A.  The 
gates  of  both  Temples  in  Fleet  Street  are  of  older, 
though  of  comparatively  recent,  origin.  That  of  the 
Inner  Temple  dates  from  the  time  of  James  I.  The 
gate  house  bears  the  feathers  of  Henry,  Prince  of 
Wales,  son  of  James  I.,  in  relief  upon  the  front,  and 
bears  also  the  misleading  and  entirely  erroneous  in- 
scription, "  formerly  the  palace  of  Henry  VIII.  and 
Cardinal  Wolsey,"  neither  of  whom  had  ever  any 
personal  connection  with  the  place.  That  of  the 
Middle  Temple  was  erected  in  1684.  It  has  a  heavy, 
red  brick  front  and  stone  dressings,  and  was  built,  after 
designs  of  Sir  Christopher  Wren,  in  place  of  the  old 
gate  house,  which  was  celebrated  because  of  its  having 
been  the  residence  of  Sir  Amias  Paulet  while  Wol- 
sey's  prisoner  at  the  Temple. 

Among  the  most  eminent  members  of  the  Inner 
Temple  Society  have  been  Sir  Edward  Coke,  Sir 
Christopher  Hatton,  Lord  Backhurst,  John  Bradford, 
John  Selden,  Heneage  Finch,  Geoffreys  Francis  Beau- 
mont, Lord  Mansfield  and  William  Cowper;  while 
the  Middle  Temple  can  boast  of  having  had  no  less 
distinguished  members  in  Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  Sir 
Thomas  Overbury,  Sir  John  Davics,  John  Ford, 
John  Pym,  Lord  Chancellor  Clarendon,  Bulstrode 
Whitelocke,  Ireton,  Evelyn,  John  Aubrey,  Lord 
Keeper  Guildford,  Lord  Chancellor  Somers,  Wycher- 


198  LONDON. 

ley,  Shadwell,  Congreve,  Elias  Ashmole,  Southerne, 
Edmund  Burke,  Sheridan,  Sir  William  Blackstone, 
Lord  Ashburton,  Lord  Chancellor  Eldon,  Lord 
Stowell,  Thomas  Moore,  Sir  Henry  Havelock  and 
other  celebrities. 

But  the  Inner  and  Middle  Temple  Societies  did 
not  long  remain  the  only  associations  of  the  kind.  It 
will  be  remembered  that  when  Gilbert  de  Fraxineto 
and  his  thirteen  Dominican  brethren  arrived  in  Eng- 
land, they  had  been  assigned  by  Henry  III.  a  piece 
of  ground  "  without  the  wall  of  the  city  by  Old- 
bourne"  (Holborn),  and  there  erected  a  priory.  In 
1276  they  removed  to  the  precinct  which  had  been 
set  aside  for  their  use  in  the  ward  of  Castle  Baynard 
by  Gregory  de  Rokesle,  then  mayor.  Then  it  was 
that  their  Holborn  property  passed  into  the  possession 
of  the  De  Lacies,  Earls  of  Lincoln.  Henry  de  Laci 
died  in  1312,  without  male  issue,  and  it  has  been  sup- 
posed that  it  was  on  his  death  that  the  property  passed 
into  the  possession  of  the  benchers  of  Lincoln's  Inn. 
This,  however,  appears  not  to  have  been  the  case,  as 
investigation  has  shown  that  the  property  had  passed 
into  their  hands  before  the  demise  of  the  last  of  the 
De  Lacies.  It  has  to  this  day,  however,  retained  the 
name,  which  it  had  acquired  in  their  day,  of  Lincoln's 
Inn.  The  buildings  comprise,  besides  the  entrance 
gate  house  in  Chancery  Lane,  the  old  and  new  halls, 
the  library,  an  especially  fine  modern  edifice,  and  the 
chapel.  The  gate  house,  which  is  of  brick,  and  which 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.       199 

faces  Chancery  Lane,  and  is  the  oldest  of  the  existing 
buildings,  was  built  by  Sir  Thomas  Lovell,  K.  G.,  son 
of  the  executor  of  Henry  VII.,  and  bears  on  it  the 
date  of  1518.  The  chambers  are  divided  into  groups 
of  buildings  named  respectively,  Stone  Buildings,  Old 
Square,  New  Square  and  New  Chambers.  The  Inn 
has  been  fortunate  also  in  the  number  of  great  men 
associated  with  it,  who  have  included  Judge  Fortescue, 
Sir  Thomas  More,  Lord  Keeper  Egerton,  Dr.  Donne, 
Attorney  General  Noy,  Sir  Henry  Spelman,  Colonel 
Hutchinson,  Prynne,  Sir  Matthew  Hale,  Sir  John 
Denham,  George  Wither,  Rush  worth,  John  Asgill, 
Lord  Shaftesbury,  Horace  Walpole,  David  Garrick, 
William  Pitt,  Lord  Erskine,  Lord  Sidmouth,  Mr. 
Canning,  Lord  Lyndhurst,  Brougham,  Cottenham 
and  Campbell,  Sir  E.  Sugden,  John  Gait,  Connop 
Thirlwall  and  others.  Cromwell  is  said  to  have  been 
a  member  of  this  Inn. 

The  fourth  Inn  of  Court — that  is,  Gray's  Inn — 
originated,  it  is  maintained,  in  the  reign  of  Edward 
III.,  and  William  Skepworth,  who  was  the  first  reader 
at  Gray's  Inn,  was  the  Justice  of  the  Common  Pleas 
during  the  reign  of  that  monarch.  The  manor  of 
Portpoole,  including  "four  messuages,  an  equal  num- 
ber of  gardens,  the  site  of  a  windmill,  eight  acres  of 
land,  ten  shillings  of  rent,  and  the  advowson  of  the 
chantry  of  Portpoole,"  were  sold  in  1 505  by  Edmund 
Lord  Grey  de  Wilton  to  a  certain  Hugh  Denny,  Esq., 
his  heirs  and  assigns.  From  the  latter's  hands  the 


200  LONDON. 

manor  passed  into  those  of  the  prior  and  the  priory 
of  East  Sheen,  Surrey,  by  whom  it  was  leased  to 
"certain  students  of  the  law."  The  lease  was  renewed 
by  Henry  VIII.,  when,  at  the  dissolution  of  the  relig- 
ious houses,  the  property  passed  into  the  possession  of 
the  crown.  The  present  hall  was  erected  in  1555- 
1560.  The  library  and  steward's  offices  were  built 
in  1738,  enlarged  and  remodelled  in  1841.  A  new 
library  was  erected  in  1883.  While  originally  divided 
into  four  courts,  Coney  Court,  Holborn  Court,  Field 
Court,  between  Fulwoods  rents  and  the  walks,  and 
Chapel  Court,  it  now  comprises  only  Field  Court, 
Gray's  Inn  Square  and  South  Square,  between  which 
are  the  hall,  chapel,  library  and  steward's  offices,  and 
Gray's  Inn  Walk,  with  Raymond's  Buildings  on  the 
west,  and  Verulam  Buildings  on  the  east,  overlook- 
ing Gray's  Inn  Road.  The  old  gateway  was  repaired 
and  thus  much  disfigured  in  1867.  Formerly  of  red 
brick,  it  was  stuccoed  over,  and  otherwise  ornamented. 
Among  the  most  famous  of  the  members  of  Gray's 
Inn  who  had  chambers  there  have  been  Lord  Chief 
Justice  Gascoigne,  Thomas  Cromwell,  Earl  of  Essex ; 
Edward  Hall,  George  Gascoigne,  Lord  Burghley, 
Nicholas  Bacon,  his  son  Francis,  Bancroft,  Juxon, 
Laud,  Sheldon,  Whitgift,  Henry  Cromwell,  Bradshaw, 
Lord  Chief  Justice  Holt,  Dr.  Richard  Sibbes,  Joseph 
Ritson,  Goldsmith,  Macaulay,  and  others. 

Officially,  the  four  inns,  or  societies,  into  wThich  the 
higher  legal  profession  may  be  said  to  be  divided,  are 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   201 

considered  equal  in  all  respects,  privileges  and  preced- 
ence ;  and  royalty  makes  it  a  point  to  be  always  rep- 
resented in  each  society,  the  present  royal  family 
being  distributed  among  them  as  follows :  King  Ed- 
ward VII.  is  a  bencher  of  the  Middle  Temple ;  the 
late  Duke  of  Saxe-Coburg-Gotha  was  associated  with 
the  Inner  Temple,  and  his  place  has  been  taken,  as  it 
were,  by  Prince  Christian  of  Schleswig-Holstein, 
while  the  Duke  of  Cornwall  and  York  and  the  Duke 
of  Cambridge  are  connected  with  Lincoln's  Inn  and 
Gray's  Inn  respectively. 

These  legal  associations  are  called  Inns  of  Court 
from  the  fact  that  they  were  originally  connected 
with  the  "  Aula  Regia,"  or  court  of  the  king's  palace. 
Their  government  is  vested  in  so-called  benchers,  which 
body  includes  the  most  distinguished  members  of  the 
English  bar,  and  comprises  some  six  thousand  barris- 
ters. It  is  the  Inns  of  Court  who  have  the  exclusive 
right  of  admitting  persons  to  practice  as  barristers, 
and  that  dignity  can  only  be  obtained  by  the  applicant 
keeping  the  requisite  number  of  terms  as  a  student  at 
one  of  the  Inns.  Only  members  and  students  who 
have  actually  been  admitted  can  enjoy  the  privileges 
of  the  library  and  chapel,  but  in  recent  times,  and 
occasionally  even  in  the  past,  it  has  not  been  unusual 
to  rent  sets  of  vacant  chambers  to  outsiders,  the  stew- 
ard of  each  inn  being  charged  with  such  arrange- 
ments; and  it  often  therefore  occurs  that  general 
solicitors,  not  entitled  to  the  dignity,  practice  or  priv- 


202  LONDON. 

ileges  of  the  barristerial  body,  are  found  established 
in  chambers  within  the  sacred  precincts  of  the  Inns 
of  Court;  while  in  our  days  even  independent  literary 
men,  brokers  and  actors  have,  in  some  instances, 
invaded  the  barristerial  domain,  and  enjoyed  the  de- 
lightful privilege  of  chambers  in  the  distinguished 
legal  sanctum. 

Each  Inn  of  Court  had  certain  so-called  Inns  of 
Chancery  attached  to  or  dependent  upon  it.  Thus  to 
the  Middle  Temple  were  attached  two  Inns  of  Chan- 
cery— New  Inn  and  Strand  Inn ;  to  the  Inner  Temple 
three  Inns  of  Chancery  —  Clifford's  Inn,  Clement's 
Inn  and  Lyons'  Inn  (now  demolished);  to  Lincoln's 
Inn  two  Inns  of  Chancery — Furnival's  Inn  and 
Thavies'  Inn ;  and  to  Gray's  Inn  two  Inns  of  Chan- 
cery— Staple  Inn  and  Barnard's  Inn.  In  modern 
times  these  have  lost  much,  however,  of  their  dis- 
tinctive character,  and  are  also  largely  invaded  by 
outsiders.  Each  of  the  Inns  of  Court  had  spacious 
grounds  attached.  The  gardens  of  the  Middle,  and 
especially  that  of  the  Inner  Temple,  however,  are  the 
most  ornate  and  beautiful ;  and  here  on  occasions  the 
illustrious  legal  society  entertains  its  friends  and  gen- 
eral society  at  its  now  renowned  garden  parties.  The 
garden  of  Gray's  Inn,  called  Gray's  Inn  Walks,  owe 
perhaps  much  of  their  celebrity  to  the  writings  of 
Charles  Lamb. 

Meanwhile  the  city  itself  had  experienced  many 
improvements  and  alterations  for  the  better.  It  had, 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   203 

indeed,  experienced  almost  complete  reconstruction 
since  the  first  of  the  great  fires,  and  in  the  recon- 
struction, stone  having  been  more  freely  used  than 
before,  the  streets  obtained  a  stability  and  dignity 
which  far  surpassed  any  former  efforts  in  that  direc- 
tion. It  is  difficult,  though,  to  form  any  exact  idea 
of  the  street  architecture  of  the  times.  The  pointed 
arch  had  only  just  been  introduced,  and  there  was 
still  but  little  window-glass.  It  is  probable  that  a 
few  of  the  houses  of  the  richer  merchants  exhibited 
the  round,  arched  and  zigzag  moulded  features  of  the 
later  Norman  style;  but  it  is  not  possible  to  ex- 
press certainty  on  this  point.  The  long,  red-tiled 
roofs  of  the  halls  of  the  city  companies  contrasted 
strongly  with  the  shingle  or  lead-covered  spires  of 
the  churches.  A  new  St.  Paul's  had,  as  we  have 
seen,  replaced  the  older  church,  and  now  reared  its 
shingled  spire  heavenwards;  and  a  new  bridge,  this 
time  of  stone,  spanned  the  Thames,  and  rendered 
famous  the  name  of  its  builder,  Peter,  of  Colechurch. 
In  Saxon,  and  even  in  Norman  times,  the  Cheap  had 
been  covered  only  by  tents  and  market  carts;  but  by 
the  close  of  the  Plantagenet  era  houses  crowded 
round  it,  and  the  mart  itself  was  strictly  limited  to 
the  market-place,  near  Bow  Church.  In  the  Cheap 
were  situated  the  principal  shops.  It  was,  in  fact,  a 
kind  of  vast  permanent  fair,  in  the  centre  of  which 
was  a  large,  open  square.  Adjoining  it,  a  little  to  the 
east,  was  the  Poultry,  and  beyond  that  again  the  so- 


204  LONDON. 

called  stocks  market,  from  which  our  modern  stock 
market  derives  its  name,  so  called  from  the  fact  that 
there  were  the  stocks  in  which  disorderly  persons 
were  exhibited  for  the  derision  of  passing  crowds. 
The  site  is  now  occupied  by  the  Mansion  House. 

Leading  off  the  Cheap  to  the  north  and  south  were 
streets  which  derived  their  names,  as  we  have  seen, 
from  the  wares  which  were  sold  at  the  booths  which 
had  formerly  been  stationed  on  the  site.  Thus,  while 
in  external  aspect  things  had  perhaps  changed  con- 
siderably since  the  old  Saxon  days,  many  of  the  old 
customs  remained.  Bread  Street  was  still  the  vast 
creamery  of  days  gone  by,  and  Milk  Street  was  still 
devoted  to  the  exclusive  sale  of  farm  produce.  In 
Friday  Street  was  to  be  had  the  food  suitable  for  fast 
days,  while  Wood  Street,  Honey  Lane,  Soapers' 
Lane,  Ironmongers'  Lane  and  Hosiers'  Lane  still 
designated  the  places  where  these  commodities  were 
to  be  had.  The  Cheap  itself  consisted,  properly 
speaking,  of  two  branches;  one  was  the  north  por- 
tion, the  most  southern  part  of  which  was  the  Poultry ; 
the  other  lay  to  the  southward  and  westward,  and 
terminated  in  the  changers'  stall,  which  was  close  to 
the  Watling  Street.  The  roadway  which  skirted  the 
market-place  was  denominated  Cheapside,  and  it  has 
to  this  day  retained  the  name.  There  was  no  Cheap- 
side  at  East  Cheap,  which  lay  between  London  Stone 
and  Tower  Street.  Here  it  was  that  the  market  was 
held  of  those  products  which  were  brought  into  the 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   205 

city  from  over  London  Bridge  or  through  Bishops- 
gate;  while  the  products  sold  in  West  Cheap,  the 
more  important  of  the  two,  were  brought  into  the  city 
principally  through  Newgate  or  Aldersgate. 

Of  the  social  life  of  those  days  it  is  not  easy  to 
reconstruct  the  picture.  Already  have  we  seen  that 
that  elegant  structure  called  modern  society  had  had 
its  beginning  in  the  days  of  the  second  William  and 
the  first  Henry.  What  society  existed,  however,  in 
those  days  was  to  be  found  at  court,  and  there  only. 
Habits  and  customs  of  life  were  then  as  yet  too 
primitive  for  what  might  be  called  private  and  sys- 
tematic entertaining.  We  have  already  seen,  how- 
ever, that  after  the  establishment  of  Gilbert  de  Frax- 
ineto  and  his  followers  in  Holborn,  the  Dominican 
brethren,  who  had  been  quartered  in  the  house  of 
Hubert  de  Bergh,  in  what  was  afterwards  Whitehall, 
sold  that  mansion  to  Gray,  Archbishop  of  York,  and  it 
became  the  London  residence  of  the  Archbishops  of 
York,  which  it  remained  until  the  fall  of  Wolsey.  Let 
it  not  be  supposed  that  Gray  was  the  first  of  the  Eng- 
lish prelates  to  prefer  the  life  of  the  capital  to  that 
of  their  quiet  and  provincial  episcopal  residences;  for 
already,  iii  1197,  Hubert  Fitzwalter,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  had  exchanged  the  manor  of  Darente, 
Kent,  with  a  certain  Gilbert  de  Glanvill,  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  for  the  manor  and  advowson  of  Lambeth. 
Previous  to  this  a  certain  grant  of  land  had  been  ob- 
tained by  one  of  his  predecessors,  on  which  it  had 


206  LONDON. 

been  intended  to  found  a  college  of  secular  canons; 
but  the  plan  being  opposed  by  the  monks  of  Christ 
Church,  who  appealed  to  the  Pope,  Hubert  desisted 
from  completing  the  undertaking;  those  buildings 
which  had  already  been  erected  were  pulled  down, 
and  the  manor  house  converted  into  a  permanent 
London  residence  for  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury, 
which  it  has  remained  ever  since;  and  here  he  enter- 
tained very  extensively,  keeping  quite  a  court  of  his 
own.  Of  the  original  building,  however,  nothing 
whatever  remains,  and  the  present  edifice  is  the 
growth  of  centuries.  The  whole  of  that  part  of  the 
palace  which  is  actually  the  residence  of  the  Arch- 
bishops of  Canterbury  was  built  by  Archbishop  How- 
ley,  in  1829-1834,  at  his  own  expense. 

With  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  entertaining 
at  Lambeth,  and  the  Archbishops  of  York  entertain- 
ing at  Whitehall,  the  court  was  hard  put  to  keep  up 
its  social  ascendency.  But  the  archbishops  were  not 
the  only  prelates  who  had  made  London  their  head- 
quarters. The  Bishop  of  Rochester,  in  Rochester 
House  (Lambeth),  or  Carlisle  House,  as  it  came  to  be 
called,  the  Bishop  of  Durham  at  Durham  House 
(Strand),  and  the  Bishop  of  Ely  at  Ely  House  (Hoi- 
born),  came  also  into  prominence  for  their  hospitality  ; 
while,  as  has  been  the  case  throughout  the  annals 
of  civic  London,  the  city  officials  vied  with  each 
other  in  the  splendor  of  their  entertainments,  and 
both  Sir  John  Poultney,  thrice  lord  mayor,  at  his 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   207 

residence  in  Upper  Thames  Street,  and  Sir  John 
Philpot,  also  lord  mayor,  at  his  residence  in  Phil- 
pot  Lane,  Fenchurch  Street,  had  the  honor  of  be- 
ing on  several  occasions  the  host  of  the  court  and 
the  prelacy. 

Of  these  residences  nothing  but  the  memory  re- 
mains. Carlisle  House,  the  palace  of  the  Bishops  of 
Rochester,  was  granted  in  1540  by  Henry  VIII.  to 
Robert  Aldrich,  Bishop  of  Carlisle,  from  whom  it 
derived  the  name  by  which  it  was  afterwards  known. 
Sold  by  the  Long  Parliament  for  a  mere  pittance,  it 
was  restored  to  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle  at  the  Restora- 
tion, but  was  never  again  used  as  an  episcopal  resi- 
dence by  the  incumbent  of  that  See,  and  fell  into 
neglect.  In  the  grounds  a  pottery  was  established, 
and  the  house  itself  was  converted  into  a  tavern,  a 
dancing  academy,  and  a  place  of  low  entertainment. 
It  was  afterwards  a  boarding  school,  and  finally,  in 
1827,  was  pulled  down,  and  the  grounds  cut  up  into 
building  lots.  Durham  House  has  met  with  the  same 
fate.  Granted  by  Henry  VIII.  to  the  Earl  of  Wilt- 
shire, it  was  restored  to  the  Bishop  of  Durham  by 
Queen  Mary,  again  granted  away  by  Elizabeth,  this 
time  to  Sir  Henry  Sidney,  and  later  to  Sir  Walter 
Raleigh,  restored  again  to  the  Bishop  of  Durham  by 
James  I.;  but,  in  1623,  when  preparations  were  being 
made  for  the  accommodation  of  the  suite  of  the  In- 
fanta, who  was  expected  in  England,  as  the  bride  of 
Prince  Charles,  Durham  House  was  assigned  to  them 


208  LONDON. 

as  their  residence ;  but  the  house  was,  as  the  marriage 
never  took  place,  not  thus  required,  and  it  finally 
passed  into  the  hands  of  Philip  Herbert,  Earl  of 
Pembroke  and  Montgomery,  who  planned  to  have  a 
new  house  here  erected.  This  was  not  accomplished, 
however,  and  the  whole  place  was  cleared  away  in  the 
beginning  of  the  reign  of  George  III.,  and  upon  the 
ground  thus  cleared  the  Adelphi  was  reared. 

A  very  similar  fate  overtook  Ely  House,  which 
came  to  be  let  by  the  See  to  various  noblemen  and 
people  of  importance.  Here  resided  Henry  Radclyff, 
Earl  of  Sussex,  who  from  there  announced  to  his 
wife  the  death  of  Henry  VIII.  The  Earl  of  War- 
wick, afterwards  Duke  of  Northumberland,  had  his 
residence  here;  and  in  the  days  of  Elizabeth  the  gate 
house  and  gardens  were  rented  to  Sir  Christopher 
Hatton,  her  handsome  Lord  Chancellor,  to  whom  she 
compelled  the  unfortunate  Cox,  then  Bishop  of  Ely, 
to  let  it  for  the  absurd  rent  of  a  red  rose,  ten  loads 
of  hay  and  ten  pounds  per  annum.  When,  in  1619, 
Gondomar,  the  Spanish  ambassador,  was  to  arrive 
from  Spain,  Ely  House  was  prepared  for  his  recep- 
tion. Meanwhile  Hatton  had  built  himself  a  house 
in  the  sight  of  the  gardens,  and  here  he  died  in  1591. 
He  was  succeeded  by  his  nephew,  and  it  was  his 
nephew's  widow,  the  Lady  Hatton  of  history,  with 
whom  the  great  Spaniard  had  his  famous  quarrel. 
Ely  House  was  finally  granted  by  James  I.  to  the 
Duke  of  Lennox,  later  Duke  of  Richmond,  and  more 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  PLANTAGENETS.   209 

quarreling  went  on,  this  time  between  the  Duchess 
of  Richmond  and  that  unconquerable  shrew,  Lady 
Hatton. 

Under  Charles  II.  Ely  House  was  once  more  the 
residence  of  the  Bishops  of  Ely,  but  seems  to  have 
fallen  gradually  into  ruin,  and  finally,  in  1775,  the 
house  was  taken  down  and  the  land  let  for  building 
purposes.  All  that  remains  now  is  the  chapel  dedi- 
cated to  St.  ^Ethelreda,  which  has  been  turned  into  a 
Catholic  church. 

Below  the  court  society  came,  of  course,  the  citi- 
zens. The  men  were  for  the  most  part  merchants, 
handicraftsmen  and  laborers,  while  the  women  sewed, 
went  to  market  and  gossiped  with  their  friends,  in 
very  much  the  same  manner  as  their  modern  succes- 
sors. Having  attained  their  end  and  secured  their 
liberties,  the  citizens  gave  themselves  up  to  the  arts 
of  commerce  and  the  arts  of  trade;  nor  did  they 
neglect  the  sports,  and  besides  the  tilts  and  tourna- 
ments, in  which  the  nobles  and  knights  took  part, 
and  which  were  usually  held  in  a  large  open  space  at 
Smithfield,  the  more  homely  and  humbler  pastimes 
of  horse-racing,  skating  and  cock-fighting — which 
last  practice  was  quite  general,  it  having  been  intro- 
duced by  the  boys  into  the  school-room  celebrations 
on  Shrove  Tuesday — were  distinctive  features  in  the 
amusements  of  the  citizens.  The  age  of  taverns  had 
scarcely  yet  seen  even  the  dawn  of  its  inception ;  still 
taverns  existed.  Of  these,  the  most  famous  were  the 
VOL.  I.— 14 


210  LONDON. 

most  popular.  The  best  known  were  perhaps  the 
suburban  resorts,  such  as  the  Albion  Tavern,  near 
Aldersgate;  the  Horn  Tavern,  near  the  Fleet;  and 
the  Cock  Tavern,  at  Tothill  Road,  Westminster,  which 
latter  became  specially  celebrated  as  the  place  where 
workmen  employed  in  the  building  of  the  abbey 
under  Henry  III.  assembled  to  receive  their  weekly 
wages.  On  the  south  side  of  the  river  were  the 
White  Hart  Tavern,  in  Southwark,  and  the  famous 
Tabard,  on  Old  Kent  Road,  where  Chaucer  makes 
his  pilgrims  halt  in  the  "Canterbury  Tales." 

In  letters  the  age  of  the  Plantagenets  was  certainly 
a  marked  advance  to  those  which  had  preceded  it, 
and  is  distinguished  by  such  names  as  Robert  Wace, 
William  of  Malmesbury,  Roger  of  Hoveden,  Robert 
Pulleyn,  Richard  of  St.  Victor,  John  of  Salisbury, 
Peter  of  Clois,  Gualtier  Mappes,  Alexander  of  Hales, 
the  irrefragable  doctor,  John  Duna  Scotus,  Walter 
Burleigh,  Robert  of  Gloucester,  Nicholas  Trivet, 
Richard  Aungervyle,  Robery  Langland,  John  Bar- 
bour  and  John  Gower. 

Under  Henry  II.  was  it  that  Oleron  wrote  his 
"Maritime  Laws,"  and  Girard  of  Wales  his  "Topo- 
graphy of  Ireland,"  Matthew  Paris  his  history,  and 
Roger  Bacon  his  alchcmystic  abstractions.  The  reign 
of  John  produced  the  philosophy  of  Albricus,  while 
the  reign  of  Edward  III.  Avitnessed  the  ready  pen  of 
Sir  John  Mandeville  narrating  his  wonderful  adven- 
tures. 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  211 


CHAPTER    VI. 

LONDON   UNDER   LANCASTER  AND   YORK. 

Accession  of  Henry  IV.— Beginnings  of  the  War  of  the  Roses 
— Commercial  Supremacy  of  London  over  Westminster- 
Richard  Whytyngton— Building  of  the  Guildhall— The  Crypt 
and  Chapel— The  Great  Hall— The  Council  Chamber— The 
Library  and  Museum— Henry  V.— The  "  Liber  Albus  "—Henry 
VI.— Lollardy  and  Witchcraft— The  Cade  Incident— The  War 
of  the  Roses  begins  in  Earnest — Possession  of  London  the  Key 
to  the  Situation— Murder  of  the  Prince  of  Wales — Edward  IV. 
— His  Commercial  Activity — Jane  Shore  and  the  Legend  of 
Shoreditch — Richard  III.  —  Murder  of  Edward  V.  and  his 
Brother — Commercial,  Ecclesiastical  and  Social  Conditions  of 
the  Lancaster  and  York  Period — Crosby  Hall — Famous  Tav- 
erns of  the  Times — The  Mitre,  on  Cheap — The  Pope's  Head, 
in  Lombard  Street — The  Bell,  in  Westminster — The  Bear,  at 
Bridge  Foot. 

THE  circumstances  which  led  to  the  seizure  of  the 
English  throne  by  Henry  IV.,  Duke  of  Hereford, 
son  of  John  of  Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lancaster,  are 
variously  estimated,  as  they  are  regarded  from  differ- 
ent points  of  view.  That  Richard  was  placed  in  a 
position  of  extreme  difficulty,  owing  to  the  intrigues, 
the  plots  and  the  counterplots  which  surrounded  him, 
there  can  be  no  doubt,  and  that  he  displayed  no  small 
courage  on  the  occasion  of  the  outbreak  of  the  insur- 


212  LONDON. 

rection — brought  about  by  the  imposition  of  the  poll 
tax  and  the  manner  in  which  it  was  collected — going 
personally  in  advance  of  Wat  Tyler  and  his  band  of 
insurgents,  is  equally  certain.  Whatever  divergence 
of  opinion  there  may  be  on  the  score  of  the  very 
summary  proceedings  which  brought  about  the  depo- 
sition of  the  king,  there  can  be  very  little  doubt  that 
the  justice  of  the  verdict  of  a  Parliament  confronted 
by  a  victorious  army  can  easily  be  called  into  question. 
Aside  from  the  propriety  of  Richard's  deposition, 
there  was  also  to  be  considered  another  question  of 
equal,  if  not  greater  moment,  and  one  which  brought 
about  the  longest  and  most  disastrous  conflict  by 
which  the  nation  has  ever  been  distracted. 

To  those  who  maintained  that  the  principle  of  the 
Salic  law,  by  which  male  descent  was  to  be  preferred 
to  that  of  females  in  the  matter  of  inheritance,  was,  if 
not  specifically,  yet  inherently  a  portion  of  the  spirit 
of  English  law,  and  who,  like  those  who  had  opposed 
the  claims  of  Henry  Plantagenet,  because  they  were 
based  on  a  female  descent,  now  opposed  those  of  the 
York  pretender  for  the  same  reason,  the  accession 
of  Henry  IV.  to  the  throne  rendered  empty  by  the 
deposition  of  the  unfortunate  Richard  seemed  not 
only  the  most  just,  but  the  most  natural  proceeding. 
To  those,  on  the  contrary,  who  maintained  that  the 
principle  of  the  Salic  law  had  not  only  never  held 
any  specific  place  in,  but  was  in  no  way  an  inherent 
portion  of  the  English  law,  Edmund  Mortimer,  son 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.    213 

of  Roger  Mortimer,  and  great  grandson  of  Lionel, 
Duke  of  Clarence,  third  son  of  Edward  III.,  was  the 
true  claimant  of  the  throne,  his  right  of  succession 
reaching  him  through  his  grandmother,  Philippa, 
heiress  of  Clarence,  daughter  of  the  above  named 
Lionel.  But  this  young  prince  dying  in  Ireland  in 
1424,  during  the  reign  of  Henry  V.,  his  mantle  as 
claimant  fell  on  the  shoulders  of  Richard,  Duke  of 
York,  eldest  son  of  Edmund's  sister  Anne,  heiress  of 
Mortimer,  and  who  was  also  a  descendant  of  Edward 
III.,  through  his  fifth  son,  Edward,  Duke  of  York, 
having  therefore  a  claim  to  the  crown  under  any  cir- 
cumstances through  the  masculine  line,  in  default  of 
issue  in  the  house  of  Lancaster. 

The  disputes  brought  about  by  this  state  of  things 
continued  through  three  reigns  succeeding  the  de- 
position of  Richard  II.,  and  the  crown  of  England 
rested  but  uneasily  on  the  head  of  the  Lancastrian 
princes.  The  city,  in  consequence,  suffered  greatly 
in  her  commerce  and  general  prosperity,  and  being  in 
a  measure  a  sort  of  focus  of  public  affairs,  came  in 
also  for  a  number  of  brawls  and  private  affrays.  By 
the  time  that  Henry  IV.  ascended  the  throne,  Lon- 
don, while  retaining  her  old  ascendency  and  prestige 
as  the  mother  city,  was  already  being  in  some  ways 
outstripped  by  the  adjoining  town  of  Westminster, 
which,  with  its  royal  palace,  its  law  courts,  and  its 
long  line  of  splendid  villas  along  the  Thames,  while 
still  a  suburb,  was  rapidly  rising  to  a  position  of 


214  LONDON. 

great  importance.  London  remained,  however,  prob- 
ably on  account  of  its  bridge,  and  the  commerce  which 
belonged  to  it  by  reason  of  this  greater  advantage,  the 
wealthier  of  the  two.  We  have  seen  in  the  preced- 
ing chapter  how  gradually  the  city  had  extended  it- 
self beyond  its  prescribed  limits,  until  the  immediate 
neighborhood  of  the  walls  was  thickly  settled  and 
built  up,  and  how  gradually  these  suburbs  came,  as 
it  were,  within  the  boundaries  of  its  municipal  ad- 
ministration. In  so  doing,  it  had  become  necessary 
to  bridge  the  Fleet.  We  have  described  the  cover- 
ing of  the  open  spaces  by  various  constructions,  the 
making  of  streets,  and  the  erection  of  permanent 
shops  in  the  Cheap,  the  erection  of  halls  and  churches, 
and  the  wealth  and  influence  of  the  religious  houses, 
which  by  the  time  of  the  accession  of  Henry  IV. 
had  come  into  possession  of  a  very  large  proportion 
of  the  city's  real  estate,  and  whose  establishments 
crowded  thickly  about  the  city's  walls,  while  the 
parish  churches  themselves  had  in  many  instances  be- 
come collegiate — that  is,  attached  to  some  communal 
foundation  to  which  were  connected  numerous  canons 
and  other  clergy.  Notwithstanding  appearances,  the 
city  was,  however,  not  wholly  given  to  prayer.  Com- 
merce flourished,  and  a  vigorous  but  friendly  rivalry 
existed  with  Ghent,  Bruges,  and  other  cities  and  com- 
mercial centres  of  the  continent. 

With  this  period  the  name  of  one  man  is  espe- 
cially associated.     Richard  Whytyngton  is  a  name  to 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  215 

conjure  with  equally  in  the  nursery,  the  library  and 
the  lecture  hall.  Though  much  in  the  nature  of  fairy 
tale  now  adorns  the  accounts  which  are  most  usual  of 
this  interesting  figure  in  London  history,  yet  a  great 
deal  that  was  formerly  discredited  has  been,  in  the 
light  of  recent  research,  found  to  be  not  only  admis- 
sible, but  perfectly  true.  His  story  has  been  thor- 
oughly investigated,  and  has  been  largely  used  by 
certain  recent  writers,  who  have  thrown  into  their 
sketches  of  his  singular  career  a  vigor  and  vitality 
which  have  given  life  to  the  old  story.  The  facts 
appear  to  have  been  these  :  Richard  Whytyngton  was 
born  of  a  good  family  in  Gloucestershire  towards  the 
middle  of  the  fourteenth  century.  He  was  the  son 
of  Sir  William  de  Whytyngton,  lord  of  the  manor  of 
Pauntley,  in  Gloucestershire,  and  who  died  in  1.360. 
Richard,  being  a  younger  son,  was  expected  to  seek 
his  living.  According  to  the  oft-told  tale,  he  deter- 
mined to  seek  the  metropolis  of  the  kingdom,  and 
there  make  a  fight.  Being  too  poor  to  ride,  he  walked 
to  London,  and  there  was  apprenticed  to  a  wealthy 
mercer,  a  certain  John  Fitz-Warren,  who  came  also 
from  the  western  country.  This  was  probably  in 
1371-1372,  during  the  reign  of  Edward  III.  The 
boy,  however,  had  a  wayward  nature,  and,  feeling  the 
irksome  burden  of  forced  labor,  he  ran  away,  and  was 
about  to  leave  the  city  when  he  was  arrested  by  the 
sound  of  the  bells  of  St.  Mary  le  Bow  as  he  sat  at 
the  foot  of  Highgate  Hill.  They  seemed  to  him  to 


216  LONDON. 

summon  him  back  to  his  work,  and  so  strongly  did 
this  impress  him  that,  rising,  he  retraced  his  steps, 
and  resumed  his  place  in  the  mercer's  establishment. 
Thereafter  he  stuck  to  business,  and  with  such  assidu- 
ity that  he  rose  steadily  in  the  esteem  of  his  employer, 
and  in  due  time  was  made  free  of  the  Mercers'  Com- 
pany, which  numbered  Richard  II.  among  its  mem- 
bers. The  king  was  not  long  in  noticing  Whytyng- 
ton. In  1379,  when  a  general  subscription  was 
raised  for  the  defence  of  the  city,  Whytyngton  sub- 
scribed five  marks  to  the  fund.  Ten  years  later  we 
find  him  putting  his  name  down  for  ten  pounds  in- 
stead, and  we  may  thereby  judge  of  the  increased 
prosperity  of  his  affairs.  In  1396,  Adam  Bamme 
having  died  while  occupying  the  mayoralty,  the  king 
took  upon  himself  to  fill  the  vacancy  by  appointing 
Whytyngton  to  the  civic  chair — an  arbitrary  measure 
which  only  Whytyngton's  popularity  rendered  pala- 
table to  the  citizens.  That  he  showed  himself  worthy 
in  every  way  of  the  king's  confidence  and  the  people's 
trust  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  he  was  duly  elected 
the  following  year  to  fill  the  same  position.  The  next 
year,  however,  Whytyngton  was  not  elected,  for  that 
year  Drew  Baryntyn  was  mayor  of  London.  Baryn- 
tyn  was  followed  by  one  Thomas  Knollys,  who  held 
the  mayoralty  when  Henry  IV.,  the  first  of  the  Lan- 
castrian princes,  ascended  the  throne.  Meanwhile 
Whytyngton  had  married  Alice  Fitz- Warren,  his 
master's  daughter,  and  had  acquired  a  splendid  for- 


Guild  Hall 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  217 

tune.  Always  alert  in  the  affairs  of  the  city,  he  was 
one  of  those  most  keenly  interested  in  the  erection  of 
the  new  Guildhall. 

It  was  long  maintained  that  the  old  edifice  in 
which,  from  time  immemorial,  the  city's  senate  had 
held  its  councils  was  in  the  Aldermanbury,  a  street  in 
Cripplegate  Ward,  and  that  the  new  one  almost  ad- 
joined it,  facing  merely  in  another  direction.  This 
has,  however,  in  the  light  of  recent  investigation  been 
proved  to  be  incorrect.  The  explanation  of  the  mis- 
take seems  to  lie  in  the  assumption  that  there  was  for- 
merly an  entrance  in  Aldermanbury,  which  led  up  a 
passage  into  the  building;  The  presumption  now 
seems  to  be,  therefore,  that  the  crypt  and  the  chapel 
belonged  to  the  older  edifice,  and  had  been  mercifully 
spared  from  the  ravages  of  the  fire  which  destroyed 
the  rest  of  the  building.  There  seems  to  be  every 
reason  to  conclude,  therefore,  that  if  the  two  buildings 
do  not  absolutely  correspond  in  the  site  of  their  erec- 
tion, yet  they  must  have  occupied  very  nearly  the 
same  area,  or  areas  very  closely  contiguous.  The 
chapel  is  held  to  have  been  built  as  early  as  the  days 
of  Edward  II.,  and  there  are  grounds  for  the  belief 
that  the  crypt  is  even  older ;  and  though  there  is  no 
record  of  the  opening  or  first  use  of  the  new  building, 
it  need  not  follow,  by  the  above,  that  the  new  edifice 
was  as  yet  completed  in  the  days  of  Whytyngton. 
There  is  authority,  in  fact,  for  the  belief  that  a  smaller 
and  temporary  structure  was  erected  first  on  the  site 


218  LONDON. 

of  the  new  hall,  to  answer  the  urgent  necessity  cre- 
ated by  the  destruction  of  the  old  building,  and  meet 
the  requirements  until  plans  could  be  discussed  and 
funds  obtained  for  the  erection  of  the  new  edifice. 
These  funds  were  raised  by  several  unusual  expedients. 
First,  a  small  payment  was  levied  on  every  apprentice, 
and  upon  the  registry  of  all  deeds,  and  fines  were  also 
imposed  on  those  petty  offenders  who  would,  at  other 
times,  have  paid  the  penalty  of  their  misdemeanors  in 
the  stocks  of  the  Poultry  market  or  the  pillory  in  the 
Cheap.  Secondly,  the  tolls  of  London  Bridge  were 
made  to  yield  up  one  hundred  pounds  of  their  annual 
total  for  six  years,  which  sum  was  to  be  used  for  re- 
pairs. It  is  probable,  however,  that  the  plans  and 
other  arrangements  concerning  the  exact  extent  of  the 
site  required  for  the  new  Guildhall  were  made  prior 
to  the  wardenship  of  Sir  Ralph  de  Sandwich,  under 
whose  administration  the  final  adjustment  of  the  city 
wards  was  accomplished,  for  the  site  of  the  new  hall 
was  a  sort  of  reservation  from  the  ward  of  Bassishaw 
added  to  that  of  Cheap. 

As  the  building  of  the  hall  progressed,  private 
generosity  became  manifest  in  the  large  donations 
which  poured  in  on  all-  sides.  To  Whytyngton's 
generosity — fulfilled,  it  is  true,  in  a  large  measure,  by 
his  executors — did  the  new  hall  owe  its  fine  pavement 
of  Purbeck  stone,  while  aldermen  and  others  con- 
tributed largely  to  the  glazing  and  heraldic  splendor 
of  the  windows.  The  niches  in  the  grand  porchway 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YOKK.  219 

were  filled  by  statues  given  at  different  times,  and  the 
splendid  kitchens  were  added  in  1501.  The  building 
itself  is  described  as  being  two  stories  in  height.  The 
chief  feature  is  said  to  have  been  the  large  arched 
entrance,  on  either  side  of  which  were  columns  en- 
riched by  spandrels,  with  escutcheons  containing  the 
armorial  bearings  of  Edward  the  Confessor  and  those 
of  England.  Two  ornamental  niches  containing  fig- 
ures were  on  either  side,  while  two  other  niches,  also 
with  figures,  adorned  the  upper  story.  The  figures 
on  the  lower  tier  represented  Religion,  Fortitude, 
Justice  and  Temperance ;  those  on  the  upper  tier 
Law  and  Learning.  Of  this  building,  however,  only 
the  crypt  and  the  actual  walls  remain,  so  frequent 
have  been  the  repairs  and  alterations.  The  Guildhall 
suffered  severely  in  the  great  fire  of  1666,  but  almost 
immediately  was  work  started  on  the  reconstruction, 
which  included  a  completely  new  front  on  King 
Street.  More  repairs  and  alterations  were  executed 
in  1706  and  1789,  this  time  on  a  scale  so  extensive  as 
to  mean  the  almost  complete  reconstruction  of  the 
entire  building.  These  last  alterations  were  accom- 
plished under  the  direction  of  George  Dance  the 
younger,  who  was  at  that  time  the  city's  architect. 

The  crypt,  which  is  both  spacious  and  vaulted,  is 
situated  beneath  the  great  hall.  This  last  apartment, 
one  of  the  finest  in  the  world,  is  one  hundred  and 
fifty-two  feet  long,  forty-nine  feet  wide  and  eighty- 
nine  feet  high  to  the  ridge  of  the  roof.  It  has  eight 


220  LONDON. 

great  bays,  the  windows  of  each  end  being  filled  with 
painted  glass  representing  important  events  connected 
with  civic  history,  more  particularly  those  of  which 
the  hall  itself  has  been  the  theatre.  And  how  many 
great  and  interesting  scenes  have  these  walls  wit- 
nessed !  Splendid  banquets,  at  which  foreign  royalty 
or  other  distinguished  visitors  have  been  the  guests  of 
honor;  important  receptions  of  returning  heroes; 
great  civic  ceremonials,  at  which  the  freedom  of  the 
city,  that  signal  honor,  has  been  accorded  to  some 
man  of  note — all  these,  and  other  great  and  similar 
functions,  have  here  been  enacted  under  the  imper- 
turbable gaze  of  those  two  great  civic  giants,  Colbrand 
of  Britain  and  Brandamore  of  Albion — more  fre- 
quently, though  incorrectly,  referred  to  as  Gog  and 
Magog — of  which  the  tradition  goes  back  to  the  days 
of  the  Roman  invasion,  when  it  is  held  that  their 
effigies,  carried  in  battle  by  the  unfortunate  Britons, 
were  of  the  greatest  help  in  their  efforts  at  defence. 
Be  that  as  it  may,  it  is  a  historical  fact  that  Colbrand 
and  Brandamore  seem  to  have  figured  as  guardians  of 
the  city  in  civic  pageants  from  the  earliest  times;  and 
it  is  related  that  on  the  entrance  of  Henry  V.  into 
London,  on  either  side  of  the  gateway  of  London 
Bridge  a  great  wooden  giant,  presumably  the  likeness 
of  the  renowned  Colbrand,  and  his  contemporary 
Brandamore,  guarded  the  entrance  to  the  city.  Dis- 
carded some  years  since  by  the  committeemen  of 
lord  mayor's  processions  as  scarcely  suitable  to  the 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  221 

times,  they  stand  grim  and  silent,  forever  gazing  at 
the  brilliant  scenes  enacted  under  their  empty  and 
sightless  scrutiny.  The  present  figures  were  made  by 
one  Richard  Saunders,  and  set  up  in  the  hall  as  late 
as  1708. 

The  Guildhall  was  in  1546  the  scene  of  the  trial 
and  condemnation  of  the  unfortunate  Anne  Askew, 
who  was  burned  at  Smithfield  on  July  16  of  that 
year.  In  January,  1571,  the  Earl  of  Surrey,  the 
poet,  was  brought  before  his  judges;  while  on  No- 
vember 13,  1563,  occurred  the  trial  of  Lady  Jane 
Grey  and  her  husband,  Lord  Guilford  Dudley ;  on 
April  17,  1554,  that  of  Sir  Nicholas  Throgmorton; 
and  in  1606  that  of  Father  Garnet,  the  learned 
Jesuit.  But  perhaps  the  greatest  scene  ever  enacted 
beneath  its  roof  was  that  when  Charles  I.,  after  his 
attempt  to  arrest  five  members  of  Parliament  in  the 
house,  attended  a  meeting  of  the  Common  Council  at 
Guildhall,  and  claimed  the  assistance  of  the  civic 
officials  to  seek  them  out,  if  they  took  refuge  in  the 
city.  The  great  hall  was  in  1866-1870  thoroughly 
repaired,  under  Sir  Horace  Jones,  the  city's  architect. 
Here,  on  the  evening  of  the  ninth  of  every  Novem- 
ber, is  held  the  annual  banquet  of  the  newly-elected 
lord  mayor,  a  function  of  great  magnificence,  which 
is  always  attended  by  the  ministers  of  the  crown. 
Besides  the  architectural  beauties  of  the  hall  and 
the  beautiful  windows,  the  principal  objects  meriting 
notice  are  the  monuments  of  Lord  Chatham,  with 


222  LONDON. 

inscription  by  Edmund  Burke;  of  William  Pitt,  with 
inscription  by  George  Canning;  of  Lord  Nelson,  with 
inscription  by  R.  B.  Sheridan ;  of  the  Duke  of  Wel- 
lington and  of  Lord  Mayor  Beckford,  on  the  pedestal 
of  which  is  inscribed  the  mayor's  famous  address  to 
George  III.  Busts  of  Lord  Beaconsfield  and  of  Mr. 
Gladstone  were  placed  here  in  1882. 

A  new  Council  Chamber,  the  foundation  stone  of 
which  was  laid  on  April  30,  1883,  was  used  for  the 
first  time  for  a  sitting  of  the  court  on  October  2, 1884. 
This  apartment,  which  is  to  the  north  of  the  great 
hall,  and  which  is  reached  by  a  passageway,  adorned 
with  busts  of  Derby,  Palmerston  and  Canning,  is 
duodecagonal  in  design.  It  is  fifty-four  feet  in 
diameter,  and  is  surrounded  by  a  corridor  nine  feet 
in  width,  above  which  is  a  gallery  for  the  accommo- 
dation of  the  representatives  of  the  press  and  the 
general  public.  The  height  from  the  floor  to  the  top 
of  the  dome  is  sixty-one  feet  and  six  inches,  and 
above  this  again  rises  the  oak  lantern  to  the  height  of 
eighty-one  feet  and  six  inches.  The  art  gallery, 
which  occupies  two  rooms  on  the  first  floor,  was 
opened  in  1886.  It  contains  paintings  by  Reynolds, 
Copley,  Hoppner,  Opie,  Lawrence,  Smirke  and  other 
well-known  artists,  and  busts  of  Nelson,  Wellington, 
Brougham,  Granville,  Canning,  Clarkson,  Havelock, 
Cobden,  Gladstone  and  Beaconsfield.  The  rooms  in 
which  the  library  and  museum  of  the  Guildhall  had 
been  situated  having  become  inadequate,  a  new  library 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  223 

was  erected  on  the  site,  immediately  to  the  right  of  the 
Guildhall  and  extending  to  Basinghall  Street.  The 
site  was  granted  in  1870,  and  the  building  itself, 
which  was  designed  by  Sir  Horace  Jones,  the  city's 
architect,  was  formally  opened  on  November  5,  1872. 
It  is  a  fine  stone  structure,  perpendicular  in  style, 
so  as  to  harmonize  with  the  Guildhall  itself.  The 
library,  which  occupies  the  upper  floors,  contains 
about  sixty  thousand  volumes.  This  includes  records 
of  pageants  and  plays  connected  with  civic  festivities, 
and  a  very  valuable  collection  of  engravings,  care- 
fully arranged  and  classified,  of  the  history,  architec- 
ture and  topography  of  London  and  its  vicinity,  the 
whole  forming  an  exceedingly  important  library  of 
reference  for  the  city's  historian.  In  the  so-called 
muniment-room  are  the  city's  archives,  which  extend 
in  almost  unbroken  line  from  the  first  charter  granted 
to  the  city  by  William  of  Normandy  down  to  the 
present  day.  The  museum  occupies  the  basement 
floor.  It  comprises  a  vast  collection  of  London  archae- 
ological and  antiquarian  curiosities,  a  large  number  of 
Roman  remains,  including  the  great  find  discovered 
in  excavating  the  foundations  of  the  Royal  Exchange, 
and  those  disclosed  by  the  digging  necessary  to  the 
erection  of  other  public  edifices,  within  and  without 
the  boundaries  of  the  city.  These  comprise  the  group 
of  Defe  Matres  found  at  Crutched  Friars,  a  hexagonal 
funeral  column  from  Ludgate  Hill,  the  statue  of  a 
Roman  warrior,  and  a  number  of  archaeological  curios- 


224  LONDON. 

ities  found  in  a  bastion  of  the  old  Roman  wall  at 
Bishopsgate;  a  piece  of  Roman  tesselated  pavement 
from  Buclesbury,  unearthed  in  1869;  a  fourth  cen- 
tury sarcophagus,  and  a  large  number  of  other  anti- 
quarian curiosities;  lamps,  terra-cotta  utensils,  vases, 
dishes,  drinking  goblets,  spoons,  bowls  and  other  mis- 
cellany; also  a  large  collection  of  mediaeval  objects, 
including  pilgrims'  staffs  and  tokens,  the  Beaufoy 
collection  of  tavern  and  tradesmen's  tokens,  and  sign- 
boards, perhaps  the  most  interesting  of  which  is  that 
of  the  Boar's  Head  Tavern,  in  East  Cheap,  where 
Prince  Henry  and  Sir  John  Falstaff  indulged  in  their 
tremendous  revels. 

Immediately  adjacent  to  the  Guildhall  was  the 
Bakewellehall,  so  called  from  the  family  of  Banquelles, 
who  succeeded  the  Cliffords  and  the  Basings  as  civic 
magnates  of  the  neighborhood.  This  hall  was  appro- 
priated in  the  days  of  Whytyngton  as  a  mart  for  the 
sale  of  broadcloth.  Both  the  chapel  and  the  Bake- 
wellehall have,  however,  long  since  disappeared,  and 
have  yielded  their  places  to  the  Bankruptcy  Court  and 
other  civic  buildings. 

Whytyngton's  second,  or,  to  be  more  correct,  his 
third  term  of  office  was  in  1406,  and  his  return  to 
the  mayoralty  was  marked  by  a  return  of  that  dread 
scourge,  the  plague,  of  which  reports  show  that  more 
than  thirty  thousand  victims  perished.  The  unpopu- 
larity of  the  king,  the  constant  riots,  the  frequent 
executions  for  high  treason,  the  oft-recurring  burning 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.    225 

of  heretics,  under  the  act  for  the  suppression  of  the 
Lollards — all  these,  added  to  the  horrors  of  the  fearful 
and  fatal  scourge,  must  have  rendered  the  year  one  of 
dreadful  anxiety  and  distress. 

With  the  accession  of  Henry  V.  the  tumult  seemed 
to  increase,  instead  of  diminish,  and  learning  and 
scholarship  were  seriously  threatened  thereby.  In  the 
midst  of  such  excitements  men  had  no  time  to  think 
or  study.  In  1413  we  find  Henry  V.  sending  a 
mandate  to  the  lord  mayor,  charging  him  to  see  that 
the  aldermen  all  reside  within  the  city.  The  year  fol- 
lowing, the  Lollards,  as  the  followers  of  the  Wycliff- 
ian  heresies  were  called,  succeeded  under  Sir  John 
Oldcastle  in  organizing  themselves,  and  in  January, 
1414,  a  riot  incited  by  them  was  with  difficulty  re- 
pressed. Sir  John  Oldcastle  himself  was  subsequently 
overtaken  in  his  native  Monmouthshire,  and  suffered 
the  penalty  of  his  treason  to  Church  and  State.  But 
amid  all  this  chaos,  if  men  did  not  find  leisure  for 
the  polite  arts,  they  at  least  found  time  to  increase 
their  fortunes.  Whytyngton  was  among  the  most 
successful  of  speculators  in  his  enterprises,  and  ac- 
cumulated vast  wealth,  which,  however,  he  dispensed 
with  generosity  and  liberality.  Wonderful  tales  are 
told  of  his  lavishness,  and  it  is  related  that  when  the 
king  returned,  in  1415,  from  the  triumphs  of  Agin- 
court,  Whytyngton  went  to  Westminster  to  greet  him, 
and  there  before  him  burned  bonds  worth  £60,000 
as  an  offering  to  his  royal  master,  thus  releasing 
VOL.  I.— 15 


226  LONDON. 

him  from  a  pressing  obligation.  It  has  been  hinted, 
however,  that  it  is  more  than  probable  that  he  had 
made  quite  as  much,  if  not  more,  in  loaning  money  to 
the  king  on  previous  occasions,  and  that,  in  the  pre- 
carious condition  of  the  royal  exchequer,  the  burned 
bonds  were  not  worth  their  nominal  value.  The  same 
year  had  seen  the  then  lord  mayor,  Nicholas  Watton, 
proceed  in  full  civic  state  through  London  to  West- 
minster, to  render  thanks  on  the  great  victory,  as 
soon  as  the  news  was  learned. 

In  1419,  in  which  year  the  king  espoused  the 
Princess  Katherino,  daughter  of  Charles  VI.,  king 
of  France,  Whytyngton  was  lord  mayor  for  the 
fourth  and  last  time,  and  though  his  term  of  office 
expired  on  January  1,  1420,  yet,  in  consideration  of 
his  really  great  services  to  the  city,  the  king  and 
queen,  on  their  return  to  London,  the  following  Feb- 
ruary, honored  him  by  becoming  his  guests  at  a  great 
banquet  given  by  him  in  their  honor.  This  was  in- 
deed the  culmination  of  his  ambitions.  To  have  at- 
tained such  social  distinction  and  fortune  must  have 
seemed  almost  a  dream  to  the  oncc-while  apprentice. 
He  survived  his  final  triumphs  but  three  years,  how- 
ever, and  died  in  1423.  His  life  had  been  one  full 
of  energy  and  hard  work,  but  by  no  means  devoid 
of  romance.  For  the  country  lad,  coming  to  London 
for  the  first  time,  it  must  have  seemed  to  him  a  won- 
derful place.  He  must  have  witnessed  many  interest- 
ing and  historic  spectacles. 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  227 

It  is  probable  that  he  was  present  at  the  last  tour- 
nament of  Richard  II.,  and  had  seen  Alice  Ferrers 
riding  through  the  Cheap  as  the  Lady  of  the  Sun ; 
occupying  the  same  balcony  that  Philippa  had  oc- 
cupied before  she  was  supplanted  in  the  king's  affec- 
tions. Often  must  he  have  looked  upon  the  gay  ban- 
ners hung  out  from  houses  in  which  some  eminent 
guest  was  then  residing,  or  indicating  the  presence  in 
the  mansion  of  some  baron  attending  Parliament.  It 
is  more  than  likely  that  he  witnessed  also  the  great 
mystery  play,  the  world's  history,  which  lasted  eight 
days,  and  was  given  by  the  parish  clerks  at  Skinner's 
Well,  near  Clerkenwell,  where  nobles  and  other  great 
people  assembled  to  behold  it.  But  his  experiences 
cannot  all  have  been  of  this  nature,  and  he  must  have 
twice  witnessed  the  horrible  sights  of  the  pest  field, 
and  seen  the  bodies  of  some  fifty  thousand  victims 
during  the  two  epidemics  pass  before  him. 

His  benefactions  did  not  end  with  his  life,  and  the 
munificent  gifts  which  he  had  made  to  the  city  during 
his  life  were  continued  by  his  orders  after  his  decease. 
Among  other  institutions  which  owe  their  foundations 
to  his  benevolence,  St.  Michael's  Seminary  (Pater- 
noster Royal)  enjoys  possibly  the  first  place,  but  he 
showed  also  his  great  interest  in  aid  of  scholarship  by 
his  gift  of  a  library  to  the  Franciscans  and  to  the 
Guildhall.  To  him  is  also  attributed  the  foundation 
of  the  first  public  library,  and  it  would  appear  that  to 
receive  the  books  thus  donated  a  large  and  com  modi- 


228  LONDON. 

ous  building  was  erected  closely  adjoining  the  chapel 
of  Guildhall.  During  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.  the 
books  were,  however,  removed  by  the  Protector  Som- 
erset, and,  though  he  promised  to  restore  them,  he 
never  did  so;  and  so  London  down  to  our  own  day 
was  left  without  a  city  library.  The  rebuilding  of 
Newgate  Prison,  the  paving  of  the  Guildhall,  the 
restorations  at  St.  Bartholomew's  Hospital,  and  the 
founding  of  an  almshouse,  were  among  the  objects  to 
which  he  devoted  a  large  portion  of  his  wealth.  Thus 
should  Whytyngton's  name  be  associated  not  only 
with  the  romantic  interest  by  which  chroniclers 
have  surrounded  him,  but  also  with  the  material 
benefits  for  which  his  fellow-citizens  should  hold  him 
in  everlasting  gratitude. 

If  Whytyngton  deserves  our  praise  for  his  admir- 
able administration  of  the  city's  interests  and  his 
benevolence,  Carpenter,  his  executor,  also  deserves 
the  gratitude  of  the  historian  because  of  his  laborious 
compilation,  the  famous  "  Liber  Albus,"  or  "  White 
Book,"  a  collection  of  London  records  made  while 
he  was  secretary  of  the  city  in  1417.  If  to  Whytyng- 
ton London  owes  the  foundation  of  its  public  library, 
it  was  Carpenter  who  was  the  founder  of  the  first 
city  school.  Like  Sir  Thomas  More,  he  belonged  to 
the  lay  brotherhood  of  the  Charterhouse,  and  seems 
to  have  been  also  associated  with  other  confraternities 
of  an  ecclesiastical  character. 

It  was  in  1416,  during  the  reign  of  Henry  V.  and 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.    229 

the  mayoralty  of  Sir  Henry  Barton,  that  the  lighting 
of  London  streets  by  lamps  was  made  obligatory,  and 
it  was  in  1422,  in  which  year  William  Waldern  was 
lord  mayor,  that  a  weather-cock  was  first  affixed  to 
the  spire  of  St.  Paul's.  Nor  was  this  a  matter  of 
light  moment,  since  record  is  made  of  it.  The  same 
year  saw  the  premature  death  of  Henry  V.  and  the 
accession  of  his  infant  son,  who  entered  London  in 
solemn  procession  Wednesday,  November  17,  1423. 
That  day  St.  Paul's  was  the  scene  of  a  strange,  im- 
pressive ceremony,  for  the  infant  king  was  led  to  the 
high  altar  and  there  made  to  kneel,  while  the  court 
stood  around  him  and  looked  down  at  the  small, 
frightened  figure  of  the  child.  The  poor  child,  who 
naturally  wondered  much  at  all  that  was  going  on 
about  him,  looked  grave  and  sad,  as  if  foreseeing  the 
dread  calamities  with  which  his  reign  was  to  be 
fraught.  Indeed,  hardly  was  the  ceremony  over  than 
the  streets  of  London  were  once  more  the  scene  of 
riots  and  affrays,  the  members  of  the  rival  factions 
of  Lancaster  and  York  giving  each  other  frequent 
battle.  Nor  could  the  city  remain  neutral  in  the 
royal  warfare,  for  it  was  itself  in  frequent  danger  of 
being  seized  by  either  one  party  or  the  other.  Thus, 
in  1426,  Sir  John  Coventry,  then  holding  the  mayor- 
alty, was  warned  of  a  conspiracy  to  sei/e  the  city, 
which  design  had  originated  Avith  and  was  to  be 
carried  out  under  the  order  of  Henry,  Cardinal  Beau- 
fort, then  Bishop  of  Winchester,  who  was  Gloucester's 


230  LONDON. 

strongest  rival.  He  at  once  ordered  the  gates  locked 
and  the  shops  closed,  and  called  out  what  armed  force 
the  city  had  at  its  disposal.  By  taking  such  effective 
measures  the  plan  failed,  but  such  events  were  of 
frequent  occurrence  during  the  forty  years  of  Henry 
VI. 's  reign. 

No  monarch,  perhaps,  who  ever  sat  on  the  British 
throne  had  so  difficult  a  role  as  that  which  Providence 
had  assigned  to  Henry  VI.  To  the  extremely  un- 
settled condition  of  affairs  in  England  was  added 
the  difficulties  which  confronted  him  in  France,  and 
to  which  his  father,  by  his  ambitions,  had  committed 
him.  To  maintain  his  claim  to  the  French  crown 
with  any  show  of  success  taxed  the  king's  resources 
and  his  supply  of  men  to  the  utmost.  Charles  VII., 
the  rightful  king  of  France,  then  at  Orleans,  living  a 
life  of  ease  and  luxury  with  the  beautiful  Agnes 
Sorel,  was  recognized  as  the  rightful  monarch  of  the 
realm  by  the  southern  and  eastern  provinces,  but  had 
not  the  energy  to  exert  himself  sufficiently  to  eject 
the  English  from  the  country.  This  energy  remained 
to  be  borne  in  the  bosom  of  "  Voyeuse  de  Domremi," 
that  fair  maid  whom  history  reveres  as  its  greatest 
heroine  under  the  name  of  Joan  of  Arc.  The  events 
with  which  her  name  is  connected  need  scarcely  be 
described.  All  know  how,  on  the  29th  of  April, 
1429,  she  succeeded  at  the  head  of  ten  thousand 
troops  in  defeating  the  British  under  the  Earl  of 
Suffolk  at  Orleans,  and,  raising  the  siege,  entered  the 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  231 

town  with  supplies ;  how,  in  June,  she  defeated  Talbot 
at  Patay,  and  how,  in  July  of  the  same  year,  Charles 
VII.  finally  entered  Rheims  in  triumph  and  was 
crowned  in  that  city's  famous  cathedral.  The  cause 
of  Henry  VI.  was  still  upheld  in  Paris,  and  the  fol- 
lowing year  he  was  crowned  in  that  city  with  great 
solemnity,  but  hastened  almost  immediately  to  Eng- 
land. 

In  London,  through  which  he  passed  on  his  way  to 
Westminster,  he  was  received  with  much  ceremony, 
and  conducted  through  the  city  by  the  mayor  and 
citizens.  A  few  years  later  another  and  even  more 
solemn  procession  passed  through  the  city  ;  for,  in 
January,  1437,  the  body  of  the  queen  mother,  widow 
of  Henry  V.,  rested  in  St.  Paul's  on  its  way  from 
Bermondsey  Abbey,  where  she  breathed  her  last,  to 
Westminster,  where  she  was  buried.  While  her 
remains  were  thus  being  transported  in  solemn  convoy 
to  their  last  resting-place,  her  second  husband,  Owen 
Tudor— he  who  became  the  father  of  the  future  king 
of  England — was,  strange  enough,  lying  in  Newgate 
Prison,  in  the  immediate  vicinity.  The  same  year 
saw  another  great  funeral  pageant  traverse  the  city — 
this  time  that  of  Joanna  of  Xavarre,  widow  of  Henry 
VI.  She  had  been  accused  of  sorcery  during  her 
step-son's  reign,  but  it  has  been  suggested  that  in  all 
probability  her  crime  was  that  of  abetting  and  sym- 
pathizing with  the  Lollards.  Such  accusations  were 
quite  common  in  those  days,  it  would  appear ;  nor 


232  LONDON. 

did  the  highest  station  act  as  a  protection.  In  the 
case  of  Eleanor  Cobham,  second  wife  of  Humphrey, 
Duke  of  Gloucester,  the  condemned  woman  performed 
a  pilgrimage  through  the  streets  of  London,  the  like 
of  which  has  seldom  been  equalled  and  never  sur- 
passed. According  to  the  usually  accepted  story,  she 
was  sent  from  Westminster  by  water,  and  walked,  with 
only  a  "keverchef"  on  her  head,  through  Fleet  Street 
to  St.  Paul's,  where  she  made  an  offering  of  a  two 
pound  wax  taper.  This  took  place  on  a  certain 
Monday,  the  thirteenth  day  of  November.  On  the 
following  Wednesday,  November  the  fifteenth,  she 
made  what  was  known  as  her  "  dismal "  walk  from 
the  Swan,  in  Thames  Street,  through  Bridge  Street 
and  Gracechurch  Street,  to  Leadenhall,  and  so  on  to 
the  church  of  St.  Katherine  Cree,  near  Aldgate.  At 
each  place  she  was  met  by  the  mayor,  in  full  civic 
robes,  the  sheriffs  and  delegations  from  the  craftguilds, 
who  accompanied  her  on  her  pilgrimage  and  witnessed 
her  submission.  It  seems,  however,  to  have  availed 
her  nothing ;  for  she  was  subsequently  condemned  to 
perpetual  imprisonment,  for  which  was  substituted 
exile  to  the  Isle  of  Man.  Her  husband,  whose 
memory  has  been  handed  down  to  us  as  the  "good 
Duke  Godfrey,"  was  not  alknved  to  long  survive  her 
disgrace,  for  he  was  foully  murdered  at  Bury  St. 
Edmunds,  and  was  promptly  followed  into  a  better 
world  by  his  half-uncle  Henry,  Cardinal  Beaufort, 
Bishop  of  Winchester. 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  233 

But  though  these  were  dead,  rivalries  still  con- 
tinued, and  the  city  was  rent  with  strife  and  constant 
quarreling.  In  the  years  immediately  following,  the 
city  records  are  extremely  meagre,  but  in  1450  an 
Irish  adventurer  named  Cade,  but  who  took  the  name 
of  Mortimer,  headed  the  so-called  Kentish  insurrec- 
tion, and,  leading  his  army  of  twenty  thousand  men 
over  the  Dartford  hills  to  the  Thames,  he  appeared 
at  the  city  gates  and  encamped  at  Blackheath,  The 
king  seems  to  have  been  terrified  and  fled  to  Kcuil- 
worth,  and  the  mayor,  a  certain  Thomas  Chalton, 
contented  himself  with  summoning  a  meeting  of  the 
Common  Council,  at  which  it  was  debated  whether  or 
not  Cade  and  his  followers  should  be  admitted  to  the 
city.  That  Cade  was  a  man  of  firmness  and  ability 
there  does  not  seem  reason  to  doubt.  The  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  and  other  great  personages  had  inter- 
views with  him,  and  he  evidently  had  the  complete 
sympathy  of  the  populace.  Of  all  the  aldermen  at 
the  council  which  Chalton  had  summoned,  one,  Robert 
Home,  seems  to  have  been  the  only  one  to  have  had 
courage  sufficient  to  advise  resistance;  but  even  had 
his  advice  been  agreed  to,  it  would  have  been  too  late, 
as  the  afternoon  of  the  day  which  had  seen  the  council 
in  the  morning  ^witnessed  the  entry  into  London  of 
Cade  and  his  men. 

Attired  in  a  gorgeous  gown  of  blue  velvet,  with 
gilt  helmet  and  spurs,  this  remarkable  man  entered 
the  city  on  horseback,  causing  a  sword  to  be  borne 


234  LONDON. 

before  him,  as  if  he  had  been  a  knight.  Coming 
over  London  Bridge,  he  passed  along  the  Watling 
Street,  and  proceeded  to  London  Stone,  which,  strik- 
ing with  his  sword,  he  exclaimed,  "Now  is  Mortimer 
lord  of  the  city !" 

The  following  day  he  repaired  to  Guildhall,  and  was 
there  deferentially  received  by  the  mayor  and  alder- 
men assembled.  On  this  occasion  Lord  Say  was  ar- 
raigned ;  but  when  he  claimed  trial  by  his  peers  as 
his  inalienable  right,  he  was  dragged  into  the  Cheap, 
and  there  beheaded,  like  a  common  malefactor,  and  in 
company  with  a  murderer  named  Hawarden.  His 
body,  being  stripped,  was  afterwards  dragged  through 
the  streets,  leaving  bloody  traces  in  its  wake.  Home 
was  summoned  to  trial  at  the  same  time  for  having 
advised  resistance  to  Cade  and  his  army,  but  escaped 
on  payment  of  five  hundred  marks.  Crouner,  Say's 
brother-in-law,  shared  his  fate,  and  being  delivered  at 
Mile  End  to  a  party  of  rebels,  their  heads  were  borne 
on  poles  through  the  city  and  set  up  on  London 
Bridge.  The  iniquities  consummated,  Cade  dined  at 
the  house  of  a  merchant,  taking  with  him  what  plate 
and  valuables  he  could  lay  his  hands  on. 

This  state  of  things  could  naturally  not  last  long. 
Lord  Scales,  who  commanded  the  garrison  at  the 
Tower,  having  been  solicited  by  the  mayor  and  alder- 
men to  act  in  concert  with  them  in  repressing  the 
robbers,  came  to  an  understanding  with  the  civic 
officials.  The  following  day  (Sunday)  and  all  that 


London  Bridge 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  235 

night  a  fierce  battle  raged  on  London  Bridge  be- 
tween the  king's  forces  and  the  robbers,  and  Cade 
and  his  men,  who  had  retired  to  Southwark,  on  the 
southern  bank  of  the  river,  for  the  night,  hi  the 
morning  found  entrance  to  the  city  denied  him.  His 
efforts  to  force  an  entrance  were  unsuccessful,  and  he 
and  his  followers  withdrew  to  Queensborough,  from 
where  they  hoped  to  escape  to  the  continent  with 
their  plunder,  which  he  had  caused  to  be  forwarded 
by  water  to  Rochester  ahead  of  him.  He  was  over- 
taken in  Sussex  and  executed,  his  head  replacing 
those  of  Say  and  Crouner  on  London  Bridge.  This 
closed  the  incident,  one  of  the  most  singular  in  the 
history  of  the  city. 

While  the  events  which  follow  belong  more  to  the 
history  of  the  nation  than  to  that  of  London  itself, 
yet  indirectly  they  had  an  influence  on  the  city  which 
renders  it  necessary  to  give  them  a  passing  notice. 
It  will  be  remembered  that  while  the  Lancastrian 
princes  were  the  representatives  in  the  masculine  line 
of  Edward  III.,  being  descended  from  his  fourth 
son,  John  of  Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lancaster,  the  princes 
of  York,  if  female  descent  be  admitted  in  this  con- 
nection, belonged  to  an  elder  branch,  they  being 
descended  from  Philippa,  Countess  of  March,  only 
daughter  and  child  of  Lionel,  Duke  of  Clarence, 
third  son  of  Edward  III.  They  were  also,  of  course, 
descended  from  Edward  III.  in  the  male  line — that 
is,  from  his  fifth  son,  Edmund,  Duke  of  York — and 


236  LONDON. 

as  such  were  the  legitimate  heirs  to  the  throne  in 
the  masculine  line,  in  the  case  of  failure  of  male  heirs 
in  the  older  masculine  and  Lancastrian  branch.  This 
claim,  however,  had  no  standing  as  long  as  the  Lan- 
castrian line  existed,  and  they  therefore,  relying  on 
the  fact  that  the  Salic  law  had  never  received  specific 
recognition  in  England,  based  their  claim  to  the 
throne  through  their  female  descent,  which  gave  them 
a  title  of  seniority  over  the  Lancastrian  branch. 

The  queen's  delivery  of  an  infant  son  on  October 
13,  1453,  removed  all  hopes  of  the  peaceful  succession 
of  the  Duke  of  York  on  the  death  of  Henry  VI.  It 
was  the  first  spark  which  ignited  the  torch  of  the 
great  civil  war  which  raged  so  fiercely  in  England  for 
some  thirty  years.  The  king,  being  seriously  ill  at 
the  time  of  his  son's  birth,  was  incapable  of  main- 
taining even  the  appearance  of  royalty,  and  the 
queen  and  the  royal  council,  deprived  of  his  support, 
easily  became  mere  tools  in  the  hands  of  the  Yorkists. 
These  at  once  sent  Somerset  to  the  Tower,  and  ap- 
pointed the  Duke  of  York  lieutenant  of  the  kingdom, 
with  power  to  open  and  to  hold  a  Parliament,  on  the 
meeting  of  which,  that  assembly,  taking  into  con- 
sideration the  troubled  state  of  the  public  affairs,  voted 
him  protector  of  the  kingdom  during  the  king's  ill- 
ness. When  Henry  VI.  recovered  his  health,  the 
following  year,  he  caused  the  protectorship  of  the 
duke  to  be  annulled,  and  himself  nominally  resumed 
the  reins  of  government.  He  recalled  Somerset  from 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  237 

the  Tower,  and  placed  the  government  in  his  hands. 
But  the  Duke  of  York  had  now  tasted  the  sweet 
balm  of  authority,  and  calling  an  army  together,  on 
the  plea  that  the  king's  ministers  were  imposing  on 
him,  and  that  the  whole  government  needed  reform, 
he  opened  hostilities  in  earnest. 

The  side  which  London  would  take  in  the  coming 
contest  it  was  felt  would  determine  its  result.  As 
in  the  days  when  JEthelred  fought  Canute,  the  pos- 
session of  the  city  was  recognized  as  the  key  of  the 
situation,  and  such  possession  the  only  road  to  the 
secure  enjoyment  of  the  throne.  Up  to  1452  the 
city  itself  had  always  been  loyal  to  the  Lancasters, 
and  had  vigorously  upheld  the  claims  of  Henry  VI. 
Times  had  changed,  however,  and  the  prestige  of  the 
Lancastrian  crown  had  been  visibly  tarnished  by  the 
reverses  which  had  overcome  English  arms  in  France. 
The  power  of  England  and  English  influence  had,  in 
fact,  practically  ceased  to  exist  in  that  country.  The 
impetus  given  by  the  Maid  of  Orleans  had  carried 
everything  before  it.  The  French  nation  awoke  like 
one  man  to  the  necessity  of  repulsing  the  invader, 
and  of  the  once  vast  dominions  of  the  English  crown 
across  the  channel,  nothing  remained  now  but  Calais. 
The  possessions  lost  were  lost  forever.  The  king  of 
England  could  no  longer  with  justice  affect  the 
French  title. 

In  approaching  London,  therefore,   the  Duke  of 
York  felt  that  the  fate  which  had  destroyed  the  Eng- 


238  LONDON. 

lish  power  on  the  continent,  and  thus  impaired  the 
prestige  of  the  house  of  Lancaster,  would  perhaps 
now  turn  in  his  favor,  and  give  him  easy  possession 
of  the  city.  He  even  hoped  that  the  gates  would  be 
promptly  opened  to  him.  But  finding  on  his  arrival 
that  entrance  was  denied  him,  he  crossed  the  Thames 
at  Kingston,  and  took  an  advantageous  position  at 
Dartford,  the  king's  army  being  at  Blackheath. 
Though  hostilities  were  for  the  moment  averted,  they 
were  only  postponed.  Civil  war  had  now  been  kin- 
dled and  could  not  be  checked,  and  a  clash  of  arms 
was  bound  to  come  in  the  near  future.  This  occurred 
at  St.  Alban's,  in  1455,  in  which  battle  the  Yorkists 
were  victorious.  Somerset  was  slain,  and  the  king 
conducted  by  the  Duke  of  York  back  to  London. 
Thus  the  "  War  of  the  Roses,"  as  it  has  been  called, 
from  the  fact  that  the  badge  of  the  Lancastrians  was  a 
red  rose  and  that  of  the  Yorkists  a  white  one,  began  in 
earnest.  Battle  followed  battle,  each  party  being 
victorious,  as  it  were,  by  turns.  To  St.  Alban's  suc- 
ceeded Bloreheath,  and  to  the  latter  Ludlow,  in  which 
the  Lancastrians  regained  their  ascendency. 

In  the  meanwhile  the  Earl  of  Warwick,  one  of  the 
most  ardent  supporters  of  the  Duke  of  York,  had 
seized  Calais,  which  he  made  a  sort  of  base  for  mili- 
tary operations.  Landing  at  Sandwich,  and  himself 
conducting  the  young  Earl  of  March,  he  sent  a 
herald  to  London  to  ascertain  the  sentiments  of  the 
city.  Unfortunately  for  the  Lancastrians,  the  finances 


LONDON  UNDEB  LANCASTER  AND  YOKK.  239 

were  not  in  the  best  of  shape,  and  the  king's  debts 
grew  rapidly  to  tremendous  proportions.  Such  a 
condition  of  affairs  affected  others  than  the  immediate 
royal  creditors,  and,  descending  down  the  scale  to 
petty  tradesmen  and  lesser  people,  affected  commerce 
grievously.  The  hearts  of  the  people  turned,  there- 
fore, from  those  who  had  the  governing  of  the  land, 
and  to  whom  they  attributed  their  grievances;  and 
when,  therefore,  the  messenger  of  the  Earl  of  War- 
wick reached  London,  he  was  kindly  received,  and  a 
deputation  of  twelve  aldermen  was  dispatched  to 
assure  the  earl  of  a  welcome;  and  on  July  2,  1460, 
they  entered  London.  A  convocation,  which  was 
being  held  at  St.  Paul's,  was  turned  suddenly  into  a 
political  meeting,  and  Warwick  harangued  those  pres- 
ent on  behalf  of  the  young  Earl  of  March,  expound- 
ing on  the  misrule  of  the  government.  Warwick 
then  made  his  father,  Salisbury,  governor  of  the 
city,  and  set  forth  to  meet  the  royal  army  at  North- 
ampton. 

Meanwhile  the  Londoners  grew  impatient,  and, 
accepting  the  leadership  of  Salisbury,  they  proceeded 
to  blockade  the  Tower.  At  Northampton  the  York- 
ists proved  successful,  and  when  the  news  of  the 
Lancastrian  defeat  reached  the  city,  and  Henry  VI. 
was  brought  back  to  London  and  made  a  prisoner 
again  in  the  bishop's  palace,  Lord  Scales,  who  had 
command  of  the  Tower,  surrendered.  Attempting  to 
escape  across  the  Thames,  he  was  unfortunately  recog- 


240  LONDON. 

nized  by  a  woman  just  as  he  was  entering  a  boat. 
The  boat  was  pursued,  and  he  was  captured  and 
killed,  his  body  being  thrown  on  to  the  Surrey  shore, 
near  the  Priory  of  St.  Mary  Overies.  The  king, 
however,  was  not  long  detained  a  prisoner  in  London, 
but  was  sent  to  his  manors  at  Greenwich  and  Eltham. 
Parliament  meeting  in  October,  they  endeavored  to 
adjust  matters  by  declaring  that  while  the  king,  as  he 
had  for  eight  and  thirty  years  peaceably  enjoyed  the 
crown,  it  should  not  be  denied  him  in  his  old  age, 
they  nevertheless  recognized  the  claims  of  the  Duke 
of  York,  and  declared  him  to  be  the  rightful  heir  to 
the  crown  on  the  king's  decease,  thus  setting  aside  the 
claims  of  the  king's  son.  Thus  it  was  hoped  that 
peace  would  at  least  be  temporarily  restored. 

The  queen,  who  after  the  defeat  of  Northampton 
had  fled  to  Durham  with  her  infant  son,  declined, 
however,  to  submit  to  any  arrangement  which  should 
debar  her  offspring  from  what  she  held  to  be  his 
legitimate  and  inalienable  right.  She  succeeded  in 
engaging  the  sympathies  of  the  northern  barons,  and 
in  collecting,  with  their  assistance,  an  army  of  twenty 
thousand  strong.  The  Duke  of  York  being  apprised 
of  this,  hastened  to  the  north,  hoping,  with  five  thou- 
sand men  that  he  had  with  him,  to  suppress  what  he 
held  to  be  at  first  only  an  incipient  insurrection.  The 
battle  of  Wakefield  followed,  in  which,  being  quite 
outnumbered  by  the  queen's  men,  the  Yorkists  were 
completely  routed,  the  Duke  of  York  being  killed  in 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  241 

the  fight,  and  a  few  days  afterward  the  Earl  of  Salis- 
bury being  beheaded  at  Pontefract.  The  queen  now 
divided  her  army,  and  sent  a  small  division  of  it  to 
the  aid  of  Jasper  Tudor,  Earl  of  Pembroke,  the 
king's  half-brother,  who  was  endeavoring  at  the  time  to 
raise  forces  in  Wales  against  Edward,  the  new  Duke 
of  York.  She  then  marched  with  the  larger  division 
towards  London,  which  had  been  left  by  the  Yorkists 
in  the  command  of  the  Earl  of  Warwick.  The  Lon- 
doners hearing  of  her  approach,  and  dreading  lest  she 
intended  to  compensate  her  northern  followers  by 
permitting  a  sack  of  the  city,  dispatched  envoys  to 
her,  begging  for  her  favor ;  but  meanwhile  they 
closed  the  gates  of  the  city  to  some  of  her  retinue 
and  the  men  at  arms  which  she  had  sent  on  ahead  of 
her.  The  young  Duke  of  York  had  meanwhile  pro- 
ceeded to  the  west  to  engage  Pembroke  and  his  men. 
In  the  battle  of  Mortimer's  Cross  which  followed  he 
gained,  in  February,  1461,  a  complete  victory,  and 
while  Pembroke  escaped,  his  father,  Owen  Tudor,  was 
taken  prisoner  and  immediately  beheaded. 

The  queen  meanwhile  was  still  advancing  on  Lon- 
don. The  Earl  of  Warwick,  who  had  gone  forth 
from  the  city  to  prevent  her  advance,  met  her  at  St. 
Alban's.  The  armies  came  together,  and  a  battle  en- 
sued which  gave  the  victory  to  the  queen.  It  did  not 
avail  her  much,  however,  as  the  Duke  of  York  ad- 
vanced on  London  from  the  other  side,  and,  collecting 
the  remnants  of  Warwick's  army,  was,  with  his  com- 
VOL.  L— 16 


242  LONDON. 

bined  forces,  in  a  position  to  give  her  battle.  Realiz- 
ing the  probabilities  of  defeat,  she  retired  to  the  north ; 
while  the  Duke  of  York,  proceeding  towards  London, 
entered  the  capital  on  February  28,  1461,  amid  the 
acclamations  of  the  fickle  populace.  He  at  once  sum- 
moned a  council  of  lords,  and  invited  the  people  of 
the  city  to  Smithfield,  the  Cheap  being  no  longer  pos- 
sible for  a  "  folkmote,"  to  express  their  will.  There, 
in  St.  John's  fields,  near  Clerkemvell,  Henry  VI.  was 
publicly  declared  to  have  forfeited  the  crown,  and 
Edward  proclaimed  king  as  Edward  IV.  The  next 
day  he  made  a  solemn  progress  through  the  city,  and 
was  crowned  at  Westminster ;  but  he  had  very  little 
time  for  peace  or  repose,  for  the  queen  had  in  the 
meanwhile  succeeded  in  collecting  an  army  of  sixty 
thousand  men  in  Yorkshire.  The  Earl  of  Warwick, 
however,  with  forty-nine  thousand  men,  was  sent  to 
meet  her,  and  Edward  followed  him.  The  two  armies 
met.  at  Towton,  near  York.  The  Lancastrians  were 
defeated,  and  the  victory  remained  with  the  Yorkists. 
The  queen  now  made  her  famous  journey  to  France 
to  induce  Louis  XL  to  aid  her  cause,  and  the  latter 
finally  acceded  to  her  wishes,  granting  her  a  small 
body  of  men  if  she,  in  return,  would  promise  Calais 
in  the  event  of  her  success.  Luck  seemed  against 
her,  for  she  was  defeated  at  Hedgeley  Moor,  in  North- 
umbria,  this  being  on  April  25,  1464,  and  afterwards 
again,  at  Hexham,  on  May  15  of  the  same  year. 
The  Duke  of  Somerset  and  the  Lords  Ross  and 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.     243 

Hungerford  were  pursued  and  captured,  and  immedi- 
ately beheaded.  The  king,  however,  managed  to  re- 
main concealed  in  Lancashire  until  July  of  the  follow- 
ing year,  when,  his  place  of  concealment  being  dis- 
closed to  Edward  IV.,  he  was  taken  prisoner  and 
conveyed  to  the  Tower. 

In  the  meantime  Edward's  marriage  to  Elizabeth 
Wydeville  had  estranged  from  him  Warwick  and  the 
other  followers,  who  became  impatient  of  the  sudden 
rise  of  the  Wydevilles.  The  now  discontented  War- 
wick, with  the  aid  of  Edward's  younger  brother,  the 
Duke  of  Clarence,  who  had  also  turned  against  him, 
dragged  the  unfortunate  king  once  more  from  his 
confinement.  A  treaty  was  made  between  Louis  XL 
and  the  Warwick-Clarence  party,  whereby,  in  the 
case  of  their  being  successful  in  re-establishing 
Henry's  authority,  the  real  power  should  be  vested 
in  the  hands  of  Warwick,  and  Clarence  should,  on 
the  king's  death,  inherit  the  crown.  An  army  having 
been  assembled,  Warwick  landed  at  Dartmouth  on 
September  3,  1470,  with  the  Duke  of  Clarence  and 
the  Earls  of  Oxford  and  Pembroke.  Warwick's 
popularity  was  immense,  and  in  a  few  days  he  had 
followers  to  the  number  of  sixty  thousand.  Hearing 
of  their  menaced  approach,  Edward  fled  to  Lynn,  in 
Norfolk,  where  he  boarded  a  ship  and  embarked  for 
the  continent. 

In  less  than  twenty-four  days  Warwick  was  master 
of  the  kingdom.  He  hastened  to  London,  and,  liber- 


244  LONDON. 

ating  the  king  from  his  prison,  summoned  a  Parliament 
in  the  name  of  the  prince  to  meet  at  Westminster. 
This  body  solemnly  recanted  their  former  errors,  and 
renounced  their  allegiance  to  the  usurping  Edward, 
declaring  Henry  to  be  the  rightful  sovereign.  As  his 
mental  incapacity  disqualified  him  for  the  manage- 
ment of  public  affairs,  Warwick  and  Clarence  were 
jointly  entrusted  with  the  regency.  Edward  had,  in 
the  meanwhile,  sought  the  hospitality  of  the  Duke  of 
Burgundy  who,  to  thwart  and  annoy  his  suzerain, 
Louis  XI.,  listened  attentively  to  Edward's  grievances, 
and  loaned  him  a  small  squadron  and  some  two 
thousand  men.  Landing  at  Ravenspur,  in  Yorkshire, 
on  March  14,  1471,  he  proceeded  to  York,  where  he 
was  joined  by  a  number  of  his  adherents.  War- 
wick, on  the  other  hand,  on  hearing  of  Edward's 
landing,  assembled  an  army  at  Leicester  and  prepared 
to  meet  the  forces  of  the  Yorkists;  but  Edward,  taking 
another  road,  gave  him  the  go-by,  and,  reaching  Lon- 
don, demanded  admittance  of  the  citizens,  who,  shifting 
once  more  their  allegiance,  opened  wide  the  gates. 
This  placed  the  unfortunate  king  in  the  hands  of  his 
enemies,  and  thus  was  this  unhappy  monarch  once 
more  conveyed  to  the  Tower  and  imprisoned. 

The  meeting  between  Edward  IV.  and  Warwick 
was,  however,  only  postponed  by  this  manoauvre,  and 
it  finally  occurred  at  Barnet,  near  London,  on  April 
14,  just  a  month  after  the  landing  of  Edward  from 
the  continent.  Meanwhile  the  unfortunate  queen  was 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.     245 

travelling  with  her  infant  son,  Edward,  Prince  of 
Wales,  through  Dorsetshire,  Somerset  and  Gloucester- 
shire, accompanied  only  by  a  small  body  of  French 
troops.  At  Tewkesbury  the  royal  family  were  over- 
taken by  Edward  and  his  men,  who  insulted  the 
queen  and  her  ladies,  and  turned  the  unfortunate 
young  prince  over  to  Lord  Hastings  and  Sir  Thomas 
Grey,  by  whom  he  was  promptly  dispatched  with 
their  daggers.  The  miserable  queen  was  conveyed 
to  London  and  thrown  into  the  Tower,  in  which 
fortress  her  husband,  the  ill-fated  Henry  VI.,  so 
shortly  after  met  his  untimely  end.  Edward  himself 
now  advanced  on  London.  The  mayor,  afterwards 
Sir  John  Stockton,  attended  by  his  sheriffs  and  the 
aldermen,  proceeding  in  full  civic  state,  went  forth  to 
Islington  to  meet  him.  Gratified  by  their  submission, 
Edward  knighted  them  by  the  roadside.  He  entered 
the  city  in  solemn  procession.  That  night  Henry  VI. 
was  murdered  in  the  Tower.  It  is  said  and  generally 
believed  that  Richard,  Duke  of  Gloucester,  afterwards 
Richard  III.,  did  the  deed.  Shakespeare  so  portrays  it 
in  his  tragedy.  The  next  day  his  body  was  brought  to 
St.  Paul's  and  exhibited  to  the  people.  If  there  were 
any  one  present  who  could  remember  that  day  eight  and 
forty  years  before,  when  the  infant  king  was  led  to  the 
foot  of  the  same  altar,  such  person  must  have  recalled, 
with  a  certain  degree  of  wonder,  the  seemingly  pro- 
phetic sadness  which  pervaded  the  countenance  of 
the  young  king  on  that  great  occasion,  as  though 


246  LONDON. 

the  child's  mind  had  had  a  glimpse  of  the  terrible 
misfortunes  and  final  tragic  end  that  awaited  him. 
Henry  VI.  was  buried  at  Chertsey  Abbey  ;  but  the 
body  was  removed  under  the  reign  of  Richard  III., 
and,  probably  as  an  atonement,  buried  beside  Edward 
IV.  in  St.  George's  Chapel  at  Windsor  Castle.  His 
unfortunate  widow,  completely  overcome  with  grief, 
was,  by  agreement  with  the  king  of  France,  released 
from  her  imprisonment  and  conveyed  to  France, 
where  she  lived  in  the  strictest  seclusion  until  her 
death,  some  years  later.  This  was,  as  it  were,  the 
final  act  of  the  "  War  of  the  Roses." 

With  the  accession  of  Edward  IV.  a  period  of 
fifteen  years  of  comparative  peace  settled  on  the  coun- 
try, and  London  was  not  long  in  experiencing  the 
benefit  thereof.  After  so  many  years  of  constant 
chaos  and  confusion,  strife  and  struggle,  the  rule  of 
any  monarch  whose  reign  was  undisturbed  by  ever- 
recurring  tumults  and  riots  would  naturally  be 
popular.  Edward  had,  besides,  a  certain  popularity 
himself.  He  had  always  remained  faithful  to  the 
pledges  which  he  had  made  to  the  city,  and  the 
treaty  which  he  had  made  with  Flanders  and  the 
Netherlands  was  most  favorably  regarded  by  the  city 
merchants.  In  the  interval  of  peace  commerce  com- 
menced again  to  look  up,  and  the  prospects  brightened 
perceptibly.  Edward  himself  disclosed  a  mercantile 
spirit  hitherto  not  displayed  by  kings.  He  himself 
engaged  in  trade  and  sent  and  sold  wool  in  Flanders. 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  247 

But  kingship,  even  when  combined  with  commercial 
pursuits  and  business  interests,  did  not  suffice  to  keep 
him  occupied,  and  he  seemed  to  find  ample  time  for 
the  indulgence  of  his  rough  convivial  spirits.  All 
will  remember  the  short-lived  career  and  tragic  end  of 
the  unfortunate  Jane  Shore,  once  the  recipient  of  the 
king's  favors.  After  Edward's  death  she  attached 
herself  to  Lord  Hastings,  but  their  known  partiality 
for  the  little  princes,  his  sons,  rendered  them  obnox- 
ious to  Richard  III.,  and,  on  the  ground  of  witch- 
craft, Hastings  was  beheaded  and  his  so-called  accom- 
plice deprived  of  her  house  and  fortune,  and  compelled 
to  do  public  penance.  Once  more  London  witnessed 
the  repulsive  sight  of  a  woman  scantily  clad  paraded 
forcibly  through  the  streets  to  St.  Paul's  and  back, 
to  ask  mercy  for  an  imaginary  crime,  followed  the 
while  by  the  jeers  of  the  multitude.  This  time  the 
Bishop  of  London,  besides  other  distinguished  persons, 
lent  their  countenance  to  the  performance  and  headed 
the  procession  in  robes  of  office.  While  Eleanor 
Cobham  had  been  allowed  no  covering  to  screen  her 
from  public  gaze,  Jane  Shore  was  permitted  a  winding 
sheet  as  covering.  In  this  she  was  more  fortunate, 
but  she  ended  even  more  miserably ;  for  it  is  related 
that  all  being  forbidden  to  give  her  alms  or  food,  she 
perished  from  hunger  and  cold  in  a  ditch  beyond 
Bishopsgate,  whence  the  present  Shoreditch.  This 
is  disputed,  however,  by  antiquaries ;  still  the  tradition 
remains  to  this  day  in  the  locality. 


248  LONDON. 

The  death  of  Edward  IV.  was  the  signal  for  re- 
newed tumult  and  disturbance,  in  which  the  city  was 
perforce  obliged  to  take  part.  The  young  prince, 
Edward  V.,  was  at  the  time  of  his  father's  demise 
residing  with  his  maternal  uncle,  Anthony  Wydeville, 
Earl  Rivers,  at  the  castle  of  Ludlow,  on  the  borders 
of  Wales.  The  patron  of  Caxton,  of  literature  and 
of  the  arts,  Rivers  was  by  far  the  most  accomplished 
nobleman  of  the  time.  The  young  prince,  then  thir- 
teen years  of  age,  had  been  most  carefully  brought 
up  and  educated.  The  instant  the  news  reached 
Rivers  that  Edward  IV.  was  dead,  he  and  his  young 
charge  started  for  London.  Richard,  Duke  of  Glou- 
cester, the  king's  youngest  brother,  had  determined, 
however,  to  possess  himself  of  the  crown.  He  was, 
after  the  late  king's  son,  the  next  in  line  of  succession — 
Edmund,  Earl  of  Rutland,  having  been  killed  at 
Wakefield,  and  George,  Duke  of  Clarence,  executed 
for  high  treason  in  the  Tower  in  1478.  Gloucester, 
who  had  obtained  from  the  late  king,  on  his  death- 
bed, the  nomination  of  regent  during  the  minority  of 
the  young  king,  at  once  started  out  from  York, 
accompanied  by  a  numerous  train,  in  advance  of  the 
royal  party.  Meeting  Edward  V.  and  his  escort  at 
Stony  Stratford,  he  caused  Earl  Rivers,  Sir  Richard 
Grey,  one  of  the  queen's  sons,  and  Sir  Thomas 
Vaughan  to  be  arrested  and  conducted  to  Pontefract. 
Possessing  himself  of  the  young  king's  person,  he 
started  on  a  return  journey  to  London.  They  were 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  249 

met  as  they  approached  by  the  lord  mayor  and  cor- 
poration of  the  city  at  Hornsey,  and  the  coronation  of 
the  young  king  was  set  for  two  months  ahead,  the 
date  being  fixed  at  June  22. 

If  Gloucester  had  hitherto  concealed  his  designs, 
he  now  no  longer  hesitated  to  avow  them  openly,  at 
least  to  his  immediate  followers.  Having  taken  the 
Duke  of  Buckingham  and  Lord  Hastings  into  his 
confidence,  he  easily  obtained  their  support.  His 
first  step  was  to  order  Sir  Richard  RadcluTe,  who  had 
the  care  of  Rivers  and  the  other  prisoners  at  Ponte- 
fract,  to  put  them  to  death.  Feeling  it  to  be  most 
important  to  obtain  the  favor  of  the  city  to  his 
plans,  Richard's  next  step  was  to  have  Sir  Edmund 
Shaw,  who  at  the  time  held  the  mayoralty,  sworn  of 
the  Privy  Council,  and  he  arranged  with  his  brother, 
Dr.  Shaw,  one  of  the  foremost  ecclesiastics  of  the  age, 
to  preach  a  sermon  at  St.  Paul's  Cross,  in  which  he 
should  hold  up  the  late  king  to  ignominy,  accuse  the 
queen  of  adultery,  proclaim  the  illegitimacy  of  the 
young  princes,  the  king's  sous,  and  extol  Rich- 
ard's virtues,  his  wisdom  and  his  courage.  At  this 
point  in  the  discourse  Richard  had  planned  that  he 
should  appear,  as  if  by  accident,  and  he  counted  that, 
with  the  aid  of  a  few  preconcerted  cheers  among  his 
followers,  the  people  would  greet  him  with  enthusiasm 
and  proclaim  him  king.  By  a  circumstance,  unfortu- 
nate for  him,  he  arrived  a  little  too  late.  The  whole 
effect  was  spoiled  thereby,  and  the  acclamations  were 


250  LONDON. 

not  forthcoming.  Speeches  were  also  made  by  other 
strong  adherents  of  the  duke,  Buckingham  and  Fitz- 
william,  the  recorder  of  the  city,  but  they  were  of  no 
avail,  and  the  people  showed  no  inclination  to  set 
aside  the  order  of  succession.  In  Buckingham's 
speech  he  stated  that  the  lords  and  commons  would 
probably  have  decided  the  matter  without  consulting 
the  opinion  of  the  people,  but  that  they  were  anxious 
to  have  the  city  with  them,  and  they  wished  and 
expected  a  reply  one  way  or  another.  Thus  was  the 
right  of  the  city  to  have  a  voice  in  the  matter  of  the 
royal  succession  tacitly  admitted.  As  silence  con- 
tinued in  the  assembly,  some  of  the  duke's  followers 
raised  a  shout  at  the  back  of  the  hall,  calling  for 
Richard  and  throwing  their  caps  in  the  air,  and,  as 
there  was  no  voice  raised  in  opposition,  Buckingham 
assumed  there  was  a  perfect  unanimity  of  opinion,  and 
invited  the  mayor  and  other  civic  dignitaries  to  put 
on  their  robes  of  office  and  to  repair  with  him  on  the 
morrow  to  Castle  Baynard,  where  the  duke  had  his 
residence,  and  place  the  crown  at  his  feet.  Richard 
affected  the  greatest  reluctance  to  avail  himself  of  the 
homage  and  high  dignity  offered  him  by  the  people. 
He  refused  at  first  to  admit  them,  and  then  pretended 
to  hesitate.  Finally  he  allowed  himself  to  be  per- 
suaded into  acceptance,  and  to  be  taken  to  West- 
minster, where  he  took  his  place  on  the  throne. 

He  could  not,  however,  feel  secure  in  his  position 
as  long  as   his  young  nephews  were  alive,  and    his 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  251 

next  step  was  therefore  to  give  orders  to  Sir  Robert 
Brakenbury,  under  whose  care  they  had  been  placed, 
to  put  them  to  death.  This  nobleman,  to  his  honor 
be  it  said,  refused  to  perform  or  to  lend  himself  to  a 
duty  so  infamous  and  horrible.  Sending  therefore  for 
Sir  James  Tyrrel,  one  of  his  creatures,  the  king  bade 
him  do  the  deed,  and  exacted  a  promise  of  Tyrrel  of 
absolute  obedience.  Brankenbury  was  then  com- 
manded to  turn  the  keys  of  the  Tower  over  to 
Tyrrel  for  one  night,  which  order  he  reluctantly 
obeyed.  The  rest  of  the  sad  story  is  well  known  to 
all.  How,  choosing  for  his  associates  two  men,  Digh- 
ton  and  Forrest  by  name,  Tyrrel  approached  the 
princes'  chamber  that  night,  and  sending  the  assas- 
sins in,  bade  them  accomplish  their  commission,  while 
he  himself  remained  without.  The  unfortunate  chil- 
dren were  in  their  bed  and  fast  asleep.  Having 
suffocated  them  with  the  bolsters  and  pillows,  they 
showed  their  naked  bodies  to  Tyrrel,  who  commanded 
that  they  should  be  buried  "deep  into  the  ground, 
under  a  heap  of  stones,  at  the  foot  of  the  stairs." 
Thus  perished  the  "  Princes  of  the  Tower,"  who  are 
perhaps  the  most  romantic  of  the  personages  of 
English  history.  Their  bones  were  found  in  the 
course  of  the  repairs  made  during  the  reign  of  Charles 
II.,  and  caused  by  that  monarch  to  be  interred  with 
much  pomp  at  Westminster  Abbey. 

Richard   III.   was  not    long  allowed    to  enjoy  in 
peace  the  throne  which  he  had  obtained  at  the  price 


252  LONDON. 

of  so  much  crime  and  bloodshed.  Hardly  had  he 
assumed  the  reiiis  of  government  before  disaffection 
followed,  and  that  in  quarters  where  he  least  expected 
it — among  his  former  most  ardent  supporters.  Buck- 
ingham and  Morton,  Bishop  of  Ely,  came  to  an  un- 
derstanding whereby  Henry,  the  young  Earl  of 
Richmond,  was  to  be  placed  upon  the  throne.  Henry 
himself  was  wrisely  kept  out  of  harm's  way  in  Brit- 
tany until  plans  could  be  matured  and  an  army  raised 
to  back  his  claims.  Buckingham  commenced  the 
campaign  by  starting  an  insurrection  in  Wales,  but 
owing  to  heavy  rains,  which  had  swelled  the  rivers 
and  made  them  impassable,  his  troops  became  dis- 
couraged and  deserted.  Finding  himself  thus  aban- 
doned, he  endeavored  to  conceal  himself  in  the  house 
of  an  old  family  servant,  by  whom  he  was  betrayed. 
He  was  brought  before  the  king  at  Salisbury,  and 
instantly  executed  for  high  treason,  November  2, 1483. 
Meanwhile  Richmond  had  made  his  preparations, 
and  set  sail  from  St.  Malo,  with  an  army  of  about 
two  thousand  men.  He  was  driven  back  by  a  storm, 
however;  but,  undiscouraged,  set  sail  again,  this  time 
from  Honfleur,  in  Normandy,  and  after  a  journey  of 
six  days  landed  at  Milford  Haven,  in  "Wales,  on 
August  7,  1485.  From  that  time  fortune  seemed  to 
favor  the  young  Earl  of  Richmond  in  every  way; 
for  when,  Richard  III.  advancing  to  prevent  his 
progress,  the  armies  met  at  Bosworth,  Henry  was 
joined  by  Lord  Stanley  with  seven  thousand  men, 


Bloody  Tower,  Tower  of  London 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  253 

and  completely  routed  the  king's  armies,  Richard 
himself  losing  his  life  on  the  field  of  battle.  Six 
days  later  Henry  entered  London  in  triumph.  At 
no  time  of  her  existence  did  London  pass  through  a 
period  so  turbulent  and  agitated  as  that  which  she 
experienced  during  the  reign  of  the  Lancastrian  and 
Yorkist  princes.  That  such  upheavals  as  those  which 
were  the  natural  outcome  of  the  civil  war  which  was 
raging  throughout  those  reigns  were,  if  not  totally 
destructive,  at  least  seriously  injurious  to  commerce 
and  business  interests,  can  be  readily  supposed.  It 
is  true  that  during  a  short  interval  of  peace  which 
succeeded  the  accession  of  Edward  IV.  commercial 
prosperity  was  largely  enhanced;  and  the  monarch 
himself,  taking  an  interest  in  trade,  did,  by  his  royal 
example,  greatly  benefit  the  commercial  relations  of 
the  nation.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  general 
apathy,  it  cannot  be  said  that  the  city  companies 
were  in  the  meanwhile  neglecting  their  opportunities. 
Fourteen  companies  obtained  charters  of  incorporation 
during  this  time — one,  the  Cordwaiuers,  from  Henry 
IV. ;  six,  the  Cutlers,  the  Vintners,  the  Brewers,  the 
Haberdashers,  the  Girdlers  and  the  Armorers,  from 
Henry  VI. ;  and  seven,  the  Woolmen,  the  Ironmon- 
gers, the  Tallow  Chandlers,  the  Dyers,  the  Pewterers, 
the  Ck)th  Workers  and  the  Cooks,  from  Edward  IV. 
Literature,  the  arts  and  society  suffered  as  much,  if 
not  more  than  commerce.  The  calendar  of  great 
names  in  literature  is  a  short  one,  and  comprises  priu- 


254  LONDON. 

cipally  the  names  of  Andrew  Wyntoun,  William 
Caxton,  William  Dunbar  and  John  Bale.  Caxton 
owed  his  success  largely  to  the  patronage  of  Anthony 
Wydeville,  Earl  Rivers,  that  accomplished  nobleman 
to  whose  talents  tribute  has  already  been  made. 
What  the  consorts  of  Henry  I.,  Henry  III.,  Edward 
I.  and  Edward  III.  had  been  to  their  time,  Earl 
Rivers  was  to  his.  Though  of  a  retiring  disposition, 
so  great  was  his  genuine  love  of  culture,  and  so  great 
the  charm  of  his  manner  and  society,  that  he  drew 
around  him  the  best  thought  and  literary  expression 
of  his  day.  With  the  exception  of  the  usual  tilts 
and  tournaments,  there  can  be  said  to  have  been  very 
little  of  what  we  to-day  would  consider  social  festivity. 
It  is  true  that  the  strong-minded  and  unhappy  con- 
sort of  Henry  VI.  endeavored  to  bring  about  her  the 
more  brilliant  element  of  the  society  of  the  day,  but 
perhaps  circumstances,  rather  than  taste,  led  her  to  be 
surrounded  by  men  of  action  and  of  the  sword,  in- 
stead of  men  of  thought  and  of  the  pen.  The  most 
splendid  entertainments  were  to  be  found  not  at  court, 
that  usual  abode  of  society,  but  in  the  civic  world. 
We  have,  of  course,  record  of  that  wonderful  enter- 
tainment given  by  Edward  V.  at  Waltham  Forest, 
during  the  mayoralty  of  William  Heriet  (Harcourt), 
but  it  was  in  the  nature  of  a  hunt  rather  than  a  social 
festival,  and  the  supper  by  which  it  was  terminated 
was  in  a  great  measure  an  orgie.  The  entertain- 
ments of  Whytyngton,  on  the  contrary,  were  not  only 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  255 

more  formal,  but  united  the  best  cooking  to  the  best 
manners  known  at  that  time. 

During  the  reign  of  Edward  IV.  Alderman  Sir 
John  Crosby  gave  in  his  mansion  in  Bishopsgate 
Street  a  series  of  very  handsome  entertainments,  the 
fame  of  which  has  descended  to  our  own  day.  Crosby 
Hall,  celebrated  as  the  scene  of  these  festivities,  has 
had  a  varied  history.  In  1518  it  was  held  by  Sir 
Thomas  More,  and  here  he  is  said  to  have  written  his 
Utopia,  and  Richard  III.  In  1523  he  sold  it  to  his 
friend,  Antonio  Bonvici,  who  some  years  later  leased 
it  to  William  Roper,  the  husband  of  More's  favorite 
daughter,  Margaret.  It  came  in  1 560  into  the  posses- 
sion of  Germayne  Cioll,  who  resided  here  until  1566, 
when  it  was  sold  to  the  merchant  prince,  Alderman 
William  Bond,  who  died  in  1576.  After  this  it  seems 
to  have  been  customary  to  lodge  ambassadors  here. 
The  Spanish  and  Danish  ambassadors  were  splendidly 
lodged  here  while  it  was  held  by  the  Bonds ;  the 
Duke  of  Sully  was  lodged  here  in  1594;  the  Duke 
of  Boron  in  1601,  and  the  Russian  ambassador  in 
1618.  In  1594  it  was  bought  by  Sir  John  Spencer, 
knight,  father-in-law  of  the  first  Earl  of  Northamp- 
ton, and  ancestor  of  the  present  marquis,  who  kept 
his  mayoralty  here  in  1594,  and  made  extensive  al- 
terations. The  Dowager  Countess  of  Pembroke  was 
living  here  in  1609,  and  some  years  later  it  became 
the  residence  of  Spencer,  Earl  of  Northampton.  It 
was  held  by  the  East  India  Company  in  1638,  and 


256  LONDON. 

was  inhabited  by  Sir  John  Langham  during  the  great 
rebellion  ;  and  royalist  prisoners,  including  Sir  Kenelm 
Digby,  were  here  retained.  It  miraculously  escaped 
the  fire  of  1666,  and  in  1672  suffered  temporary 
transformation  into  a  Non-Conformist  meeting-house, 
and  was  used  for  this  purpose  down  to  1769.  The 
office  of  the  Penny  Post  occupied  Crosby  Hall  in 
1678-1679,  and  in  1700  the  East  India  Company 
again  occupied  the  premises,  from  which  they  removed 
to  a  building  of  their  own.  From  1810  to  1831  it 
was  leased  to  a  firm  of  packers.  It  was  extensively 
repaired,  public  attention  having  been  drawn  to  its 
architectural  merits,  in  1836,  and  was  used  for  a  time 
for  benevolent  purposes,  fairs  and  the  like,  but,  fall- 
ing into  disrepute  for  such  entertainments,  was  leased 
to  the  Crosby  Hall  Literary  Institute.  This  came  to 
an  end  in  1860,  and  for  the  following  seven  years 
Crosby  Hall  served  as  the  storehouse  of  a  wine  mer- 
chant. In  1868  it  became  a  restaurant,  and  has  been 
thus  used  ever  since.  It  well  deserves  a  visit  as  one 
of  the  few  remaining  bits  of  mediaeval  architecture 
now  left  in  London,  and  for  many  years  was  held  to 
be  the  finest  private  mansion  in  the  city.  The  por- 
tions now  remaining  consist  of  the  banqueting  hall,  a 
chamber  sixty-nine  feet  in  width  and  thirty-eight  in 
height,  having  a  fine  open,  timber  roof,  the  throne 
room,  formerly  used  when  entertaining  royalty,  forty- 
two  feet  long  and  twenty-two  feet  in  height,  and  the 
handsome  council  chamber,  or  withdrawing  room, 


LONDON  UNDER  LANCASTER  AND  YORK.  257 

having  the  same  proportions,  and  possessing  a  very 
fine  carved  ceiling. 

In  such  an  age  of  civil  strife  and  conspiracy  as  the 
Lancastrian- York  period,  the  tavern  was  bound  to 
play  an  even  more  important  part  than  in  an  age  of 
peaceful  discussion  and  friendly  farce.  The  Mitre,  in 
the  Cheap,  was  perhaps  of  all  the  most  conspicuous  at 
this  period.  Its  central  locality,  added  to  other  facili- 
ties, including  back  entrances  in  obscure  lanes,  ren- 
dered it  a  place  especially  suitable  for  such  discussions 
as  were  then  taking  place.  It  was  probably  on  the 
corner  of  Bread  Street,  from  whence  it  was  sometimes 
called  the  Mitre,  in  Bread  Street.  Another  famous 
tavern  was  the  Pope's  Head,  in  Lombard  Street,  which 
is  mentioned  as  early  as  1464,  when,  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  IV.,  it  was  the  scene  of  the  wager  between 
an  Alicant  and  an  English  goldsmith  as  regards  the 
superiority  of  their  respective  work.  A  convenient 
passageway  led  from  the  back  of  the  tavern  into 
Cornhill.  The  place  was  destroyed  during  the  great 
fire,  but  rebuilt.  Here  it  was  that  in  1718  Quin,  the 
actor,  fought  the  mortal  combat  with  Bowen,  in  which 
the  latter  was  killed.  Other  noted  public  houses  of 
the  period  were  the  White  Lion  and  the  White  Hart 
Inn,  the  last  mentioned  in  Covent  Garden.  The  Bell, 
at  Westminster,  and  the  Bear,  at  Bridge  Foot,  South- 
wark,  were  also  famous  halting  places,  where  mirth 
and  malt  mixed  fast  and  furious,  and  strangers  halted 
before  entering  or  on  leaving  the  city.  Both  are 
VOL.  I.— 17 


258  LONDON. 

referred  to  by  Sir  John  Howard,  in  his  "  Journal  of 
Expenses."  The  former,  which,  with  its  stableyard, 
was  situated  on  the  north  side  of  King  Street,  has 
long  since  passed  away.  Here  Pepys  used  to  dine, 
and  here  occurred  the  dinner  described  by  Sir  Wil- 
liam Waller  in  his  "Vindication,"  which  is  also  men- 
tioned by  Denzil  Holies  in  his  "  Memoirs."  In  Queen 
Anne's  time  the  October  Club  used  to  meet  here. 
The  Bear  was  pulled  down  in  1761,  when  the  houses 
on  London  Bridge  were  removed  and  the  bridge 
widened. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.      259 


CHAPTER  VII. 

LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS. 

Accession  of  Henry  VII. — Public  Worship  of  the  Hero  King — His 
Coronation  at  Westminster — The  Uprising  in  Favor  of  Lambert 
Simnel — The  Conspiracy  of  Perkin  Warbeck — The  Imposition 
of  Fines  and  Penalties  on  City  Magnates — Henry  VIII. — The 
Great  Coronation  Festivities — The  Holy  League — The  Rise  of 
Wolsey — The  Royal  Divorce  at  Blackfriars — The  Dissolution  of 
the  Monastic  Establishments  and  other  Religious  Houses — Fate 
of  the  Elsyng  Hospital— The  Carthusian  Executions — The  Sick 
and  Starving  Homeless — Re-establishment  of  St.  Bartholomew's 
Hospital  by  Royal  Charter — Christ  Church — The  Foundation 
of  Bedlam— The  Court  of  Whitehall— St.  James'  Palace— Dis- 
tribution of  Spoils — Fate  of  St.  Faith's  Belfry— Suppression  of 
Westminster  Abbey — The  King's  Marriages — The  English  Ter- 
ror— St.  Paul's  School — St.  Anthony's  Pigs — Trinity  House — 
The  State  of  Society — Formal  Entertainments— Beaufort  House 
— Worcester  House — Tower  Hill  a  Fashionable  Locality — 
Fisher's  Folly — Famous  Names  in  Art  and  Letters. 

THE  victory  of  Henry  VII.  at  Bosworth  was  de- 
cisive. Six  days  later  he  entered  London  in  tri- 
umph. He  was  received  outside  the  gates  by  Sir 
Thomas  Hill,  who  then  held  the  mayoralty,  and  who, 
accompanied  by  his  sheriffs,  the  aldermen  and  other 
civic  officials,  advanced  to  meet  him.  Entering  the 
city  amid  the  acclamations  of  the  people,  he  proceeded 
in  solemn  procession  to  St.  Paul's,  where  he  offered 


260  LONDON. 

the  standards  which  he  had  taken  at  Bosworth.  This 
occurred  on  August  28,  1485.  On  October  30  his 
coronation  followed.  It  was  a  very  great  affair ;  but 
however  august  the  ceremonial  may  have  been  in 
lavish  display,  its  grandeur  derived  its  special  signifi- 
cance from  the  good  will  and  enthusiasm  of  the 
people.  The  festivities  which  followed  were  inter- 
rupted, however,  by  the  terrible  scourge  which  visited 
London  that  year,  and  to  which  was  given  the  name 
of  the  "  Sweating  Sickness."  The  mayor,  Sir  Thomas 
Hill,  was  one  of  the  first  to  succumb  to  the  dread 
scourge.  He  was  followed  in  office  by  Sir  William 
Stocker,  who  had,  however,  only  enjoyed  his  office  for 
three  days  when  he  was  also  attacked,  and  followed 
his  predecessor  to  the  grave.  Six  aldermen  shared 
their  fate.  A  third  mayor,  a  certain  John  Ward,  was 
elected  to  fill  Stocker's  place,  and  retained  the  office 
until  the  next  Michaelmas  election,  which  placed  the 
Irishman,  Hugh  Brise,  in  the  civic  chair.  Thus,  in 
the  short  space  of  six  months,  four  different  mayors 
were  seated  at  Guildhall. 

The  accession  of  Henry  VII.  is  nearly  coincident 
with  the  beginning  of  what  may  be  considered  modern 
history,  properly  speaking.  The  final  important 
changes  in  the  European  populations  had  been  ef- 
fected. The  improvement  of  navigation  was  about 
to  open  up  a  new  continent  to  commerce,  and  to  ac- 
complish a  new  route,  as  it  were,  to  Asia,  the  incalcu- 
lable riches  of  which  would  henceforth  become  acces- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  261 

sible  to  "Western  Europe.  It  was  the  dawn  of  a 
new  system  of  relations  between  the  nations  of 
Europe,  and  the  events  of  the  reign  of  Henry  VII. 
in  England,  and  those  of  the  reign  following,  may 
very  properly  be  regarded  as  the  commencement  of 
that  series  of  wars  and  internal  political  negotiations 
between  the  different  kingdoms  and  nations  of  Europe 
which  has  continued  until  the  present  day. 

But  if  the  accession  of  Henry  VII.  marked  a 
period  in  European  history,  it  also  marked  a  period  in 
the  history  of  London.  The  civic  constitution  was 
now  settled,  and  the  furthermost  ring  of  then  existing 
suburbs  had  been  brought  within  the  pale  of  city 
government.  The  finishing  touches  had,  to  use  a 
poetic  expression,  been  put  to  the  municipal  fabric. 
The  terrible  chaos  and  confusion  which  the  constant 
wars  of  the  last  few  reigns  had  brought  about  caused 
the  almost  complete  ruin  of  commerce,  followed  by 
that  terrible  financial  depression  consequent  upon 
such  conditions.  When  the  young  Earl  of  Richmond 
ascended  the  throne  it  was  felt  by  all  that  an  era  of 
peace  and  prosperity  had  set  in  upon  the  kingdom. 
The  king  himself  was  handsome  and  popular,  and  it 
was  hoped  that  his  marriage  with  the  young  Princess 
Elizabeth  of  York  would,  by  uniting  in  the  person 
of  his  issue  the  rival  claims  of  Lancaster  and  York, 
bring  about  a  permanent  cessation  of  hostilities  be- 
tween those  rival  factions  which  had  so  long  been 
struggling  for  the  possession  of  the  throne. 


262  LONDON. 

The  coronation  of  Henry  VII.,  which  took  place  at 
Westminster,  on  October  30,  1485,  was  an  event  of 
great  magnitude,  and  one  which  surpassed  in  splendor 
any  previous  ceremony  of  the  kind.  It  was  itself 
surpassed,  certainly  inasmuch  as  popular  enthusiasm 
was  concerned,  by  his  marriage.  The  last-mentioned 
ceremony  occurred  January  18,  1486.  The  king  had 
postponed  this  event  until  he  should  himself  have  been 
crowned,  so  solicitous  was  he  that  his  title  should  not 
be  thought  to  come  to  him  in  virtue  of  his  wife.  He 
wished  first  to  establish  his  own  individual  claims, 
and  as  he  had,  though  descended  from  John  of  Gaunt, 
Duke  of  Lancaster,  no  real  hereditary  right  to  the 
crown,  his  claims  were  purely  personal,  and  his  title, 
one  might  almost  say,  elective.  Only  after  his  own 
title  had  been  fully  recognized  by  Parliament  and  the 
nation  was  he  willing  to  fulfill  the  promise  he  had 
made  to  marry  Elizabeth  of  York.  So  sensitive  was 
he  on  the  subject  of  his  title  that  he  even  went  so  far 
as  to  seek  its  confirmation,  the  following  year,  from 
the  Pope  as  his  feudal  superior  and  suzerain,  which 
confirmation  Innocent  VIII.,  who  then  sat  on  the 
throne  of  St.  Peter,  willingly  granted,  as  he  saw  in 
the  young  king  an  augury  of  peace  and  prosperity  for 
unhappy  England. 

But  Henry  VII.  was  not  to  enjoy  an  era  of  undis- 
turbed and  peaceful  possession,  for  twice  there  arose 
from  unexpected  quarters  an  element  of  discord 
which,  though  ultimately  overcome,  yet  seriously 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOES.  263 

threatened  the  welfare  of  the  nation  and  the  security 
of  the  throne.  The  uprising  in  favor  of  Lambert 
Simnel,  the  pretended  Earl  of  Warwick,  threatened 
to  attain  proportions  at  once  formidable  and  disas- 
trous. But  the  good  humor  of  Henry  VII.  here 
showed  forth  in  the  highest  degree ;  for,  having  won  a 
decisive  victory  over  Simnel  and  his  followers  at 
Stoke,  near  Warwick,  he  pardoned  him,  and  made 
him  a  scullion  in  his  kitchen.  To  make  his  humilia- 
tion even  more  complete,  he  ordered  that  the  unfortu- 
nate Warwick,  who  was  then  suffering  imprisonment 
in  the  Tower,  should  be  taken  in  procession  through 
the  streets  of  the  city,  that  every  one  might  see  that 
he  was  still  alive.  It  was  the  last  time  that  unfortu- 
nate man  saw  the  familiar  landmarks  of  London,  for 
two  years  later,  in  1499,  he  was  executed  in  the 
Tower  for  no  other  reason  than  that  he  was  a  danger- 
ous rival  as  claimant  of  the  crown.  His  execution  is 
the  darkest  spot  in  the  career  of  Henry  VII. 

In  defeating  the  conspiracy  which  aimed  at  placing 
Perkin  Warbeck  on  the  throne  of  England,  by  caus- 
ing him  to  impersonate  Richard,  the  little  Duke  of 
York,  who  it  was  publicly  rumored  had  escaped  from 
the  Tower,  Henry  found  far  greater  difficulty.  Sup- 
ported in  his  pretensions  by  Charles  VIII.,  King  of 
France,  and  by  the  Duchess  of  Burgundy,  and  later 
by  James  IV.,  King  of  Scotland,  Perkin  Warbeck 
was  a  far  more  formidable  person  than  the  unfortu- 
nate Simnel.  Henry,  however,  acted  with  his  usual 


264  LONDON. 

caution  and  deliberation.  Determining  first  to  sub- 
stantiate the  actual  death  of  the  Duke  of  York,  he 
caused  to  be  looked  up  two  of  the  persons  employed 
in  the  murder  of  the  princes — namely,  Forrest  and 
Dighton — and  they  agreed  to  the  same  story  as  to  the 
assassination  of  Edward  V.  and  his  brother.  Their 
statements  were  made  public,  and  had  a  great  effect 
in  quieting  the  agitation.  In  fact,  the  attempt  finally 
came  to  the  same  abortive  end  as  that  uprising  which 
had  been  started  in  favor  of  Simnel ;  for,  on  the  ap- 
proach of  Henry  VII.  and  his  army,  Warbeck,  who 
had  landed  in  England,  and  was  with  seven  thousand 
followers  near  Taunton,  despaired  of  success,  and 
sought  safety  in  the  sanctuary  of  Beaulieu.  He  was 
captured,  however,  and  taken  to  London,  where  he 
was  imprisoned  in  the  Tower,  and  suffered  execution 
in  November,  1499,  a  few  days  before  the  same  fate 
was  meted  out  to  the  Earl  of  Warwick. 

All  obstacles  to  his  peaceful  possession  of  the  throne 
being  now  removed,  Henry,  who  had  begun  his  reign 
by  measures  of  the  greatest  financial  prudence,  yielded 
to  his  natural  inclination  of  avarice,  and  marred  by 
this  fault  the  otherwise  perfect  justice  and  equity  of 
his  administration.  He  had  inaugurated  his  reign  by 
what  was  a  perfectly  new  departure,  for  he  it  was 
who,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  invented  the  national 
debt.  Borrowing  thirty  thousand  marks  for  a  speci- 
fied time,  he  surprised  his  lenders  by  repaying  the 
loan  at  the  time  specified.  By  this  he  was  enabled,  a 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOKS.      265 

few  years  later — that  is,  in  1488 — to  obtain  a  loan  of 
six  thousand  pounds  without  much  difficulty.  Un- 
fortunately for  his  popularity,  he  did  not  find  this 
method  of  obtaining  i'unds  sufficiently  desirable  to 
continue  it.  In  1491  he  demanded,  therefore,  a  so- 
called  benevolence,  and  appointed  Empson  and  Dud- 
ley to  collect  this  sort  of  gratuitous  tax. 

Their  conduct  in  London  especially  was  signalized 
by  the  greatest  brutality.  They  levied  fines  in  every 
direction,  and  for  the  most  trivial,  if  not  wholly 
imaginary,  reasons.  Sir  William  Capel,  one  of  the 
city's  richest  men,  and  at  the  time  an  alderman,  was 
called  on  to  pay  a  fine  of  two  thousand  seven  hundred 
pounds  for  the  infringement  of  some  altogether  for- 
gotten law,  and  while  the  penalty  was  reduced  to  half 
of  its  original  proportions  by  the  influence  of  power- 
ful friends  at  court,  this  was  not  done  until  he  had 
actually  been  committed  to  the  custody  of  the  sheriff. 
Nor  did  these  persecutions  cease  here.  Others  were 
apprehended  on  various  trumped-up  charges,  and 
only  released  on  the  payment  of  very  large  fines. 
Sir  Thomas  Kinesworth  was  one  of  the  victims  of  this 
system  of  taxation,  or  rather  extortion,  in  1509.  He 
had  occupied  the  mayoralty  in  1507,  some  two  years 
before.  The  timorous  sank  beneath  the  preferred  and 
fictitious  charges,  and  in  two  cases  actually  died  from 
grief,  disappointment  and  mortification  induced  there- 
by. These  included  a  certain  Christopher  Hawes,  an 
alderman  and  a  man  of  large  means,  and  a  certain 


266  LONDON. 

William  Fitz-William,  who  had  held  the  post  of 
mayor's  deputy  and  sheriff  under  Sir  Richard  Had- 
don,  who  occupied  the  mayoral  chair  in  1506.  Sir 
William  Capel,  however,  was  not  so  easily  overcome 
by  his  adversities.  Perhaps  his  first  experience  had 
given  him  courage,  for  when  some  years  later  the 
king's  agents,  Empson  and  Dudley,  again  came  upon 
him,  on  the  ground  of  some  other  alleged  misuse  of 
office  and  influence,  and  demanded  this  time  two 
thousand  pounds,  Capel  positively  refused  to  pay  one 
cent  of  the  so-called  fine,  and  calmly  allowed  himself 
to  be  conveyed  to  the  compter  and  the  sheriff's  prison 
without  protesting,  and  later  was  also  equally  calm 
on  being  transferred  to  the  Tower,  where  he  remained 
until  the  end  of  the  reign. 

The  system  of  imposing  fines  for  the  commission 
of  crimes  extended  even  to  the  gravest  offences ;  even 
high  treason  seems,  in  fact,  to  have  been  an  offence 
for  which  a  payment  would  purchase  pardon.  Thus 
in  the  rebellion  of  1498,  when  the  rioters  under  Lord 
Audley  actually  threatened  London  from  Blackheath, 
and  the  king  was  even  obliged  to  lead  his  troops  in 
person  against  the  rebels,  whom  he  signally  defeated, 
they  were,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  leaders  who 
suffered  the  death  penalty,  all  pardoned  at  so  much  a 
head.  In  this  the  reign  of  Henry  VII.  stands  out 
in  strong  contrast  to  the  excessive  severity  of  those 
that  followed  it.  The  king  was  lenient  and  over- 
indulgent  to  a  fault,  save  when  he  required  funds, 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.      267 

and  then  he  employed  agents  to  devise  methods 
whereby  these  might  be  obtained.  Henry  VII. 
doubtless  appreciated  how  impossible  it  is  to  accom- 
plish anything  in  the  world  without  the  necessary 
funds,  and  his  very  natural  desire  to  provide  suitably 
for  the  future  of  his  dynasty  may  have  led  him  to  the 
excesses  which  may  thus  be  pardoned,  if  not  excused. 
That  his  death  was  not  more  mourned  is  due,  prob- 
ably, more  to  the  fickleness  of  the  populace,  who, 
like  its  betters,  always  turns  its  face  towards  the 
rising  sun,  than  to  any  lack  of  kingly  virtue  in  the 
dead  monarch. 

Henry  VIII.,  who  succeeded  his  father,  ascended 
the  throne  amid  the  rejoicings  of  a  devoted  and  loyal 
people,  and  with  every  prospect  of  a  splendid  reign. 
The  young  king  was  now  in  his  nineteenth  year.  He 
had  received  a  broad  and  liberal  education,  and  was 
endowed  with  both  grace  and  charm  of  person,  a  cer- 
tain manly  beauty  and  great  dexterity  in  all  athletic 
exercises.  The  impetuosity  of  his  disposition  seemed 
to  have  a  generous  heart  as  its  motive  power,  and  his 
liberality  and  love  of  splendor  endeared  him  rather 
than  otherwise  to  his  subjects.  One  entertainment 
succeeded  another,  the  perfectly  tranquil  state  of 
public  affairs  permitting  the  court  to  devote  itself 
exclusively  to  matters  of  pleasure.  Henry  VIII., 
occupying  himself  more  with  the  spending  of  his 
father's  accumulated  treasure  than  with  increasing  its 
proportions,  the  late  king's  agents,  Empson  and 


268  LONDON. 

Dudley,  were  committed  to  the  Tower,  and,  in  order 
to  gratify  public  fancy,  they  were  charged  with  the 
most  improbable  crimes,  and  executed  the  following 
year. 

Henry  VIII.  ascended  the  throne  on  April  7,  1509. 
On  June  7  following  he  was  married  to  Katherine, 
daughter  of  Ferdinand,  King  of  Arragon,  and  of 
Isabel,  Queen  of  Castile ;  she  was  the  widow  of  his 
elder  brother,  Arthur,  Prince  of  Wales,  and  the 
young  king  and  queen  were  crowned  at  Westminster 
on  June  24  following  by  William  Warham,  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury.  If  the  ceremonial  used  for 
the  coronation  of  Henry  VII.  was  held  to  have  ex- 
ceeded in  splendor  any  that  preceded  it,  that  which 
was  displayed  for  the  coronation  of  Henry  VIII. 
was  even  greater.  The  Earl  of  Surrey,  who  at  that 
time  held  the  post  of  treasurer  of  the  realm,  and 
Fox,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  keeper  of  the  privy  seal, 
acted  as  the  king's  advisers.  Both  were  men  of  splen- 
did tastes,  and  under  their  guidance  the  coronation 
ceremonial  developed  itself  to  an  hitherto  unparal- 
leled extent.  At  the  time  when  the  Tower  was  the 
usual  London  residence  of  English  sovereigns,  it  had 
been  natural  that  the  king  should  start  from  that 
fortress  when  proceeding  to  his  coronation  at  West- 
minster. Later,  when  Westminster  became  and  the 
Tower  ceased  to  be  the  official  residence  of  the  sov- 
ereign, the  custom  was  continued,  and  the  vigil  of  the 
coronation,  if  not  longer,  was  spent  at  the  Tower. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  2G9 

The  king  dined  at  the  Tower  the  day  before  the  cere- 
mony itself,  and  the  afternoon  was  spent  in  receiving 
nobles,  bishops,  judges,  and  other  high  officials  and 
distinguished  personages,  who  had  come  from  diifereut 
parts  of  the  kingdom.  The  king  also  received  the 
mayor  and  civic  officials,  who  gave  him  assurance  of 
safe  conduct  through  the  city  on  the  following  day. 
That  evening  the  installation  of  the  Knights  of  the 
Bath  took  place  in  the  chapel  of  St.  John,  in  the 
Tower,  and  the  newly-created  knights  made  their 
vigil  that  night,  praying  and  watching  their  armor. 

Meanwhile  great  preparations  were  going  on 
throughout  the  city.  The  streets  were  thoroughly 
cleaned  and  sand  was  sprinkled  along  the  route  of 
the  procession.  The  houses  were  sumptuously  decor- 
ated, tapestries  of  great  value  being  hung  from  the 
windows  and  balconies,  bands  of  music  were  stationed 
at  different  places,  and  triumphal  arches,  more  or  less 
elaborate,  were  erected  at  intervals  along  the  route. 
The  civic  officials  and  aldermen  stationed  themselves 
on  Cheapside,  where  the  king  was  received  by  the 
mayor,  who  delivered  an  address,  to  which  the  king 
replied  appropriately,  the  king  and  his  train  then 
resuming  its  stately  progress.  The  procession  itself 
consisted  for  the  most  part  of  royalty  and  its  attend- 
ants, ecclesiastical,  civil  and  military,  of  the  great 
officers  of  state,  the  peers,  judges  and  other  high 
official  personages.  The  accounts  of  the  coronation 
of  Eleanor  of  Provence,  consort  of  Henry  III.,  which 


270  LONDON. 

occurred  in  1235,  give  details  concerning  the  caval- 
cade of  citizens  of  London,  who,  claiming  the  privi- 
lege of  attending  the  king  and  queen  as  cellarers, 
rode  forth  in  splendid  flowing  garments,  embroidered 
in  gold  and  silk  of  various  colors,  and  formed  part 
of  the  royal  procession  from  the  Tower  to  Westmin- 
ster. They  were  about  three  hundred  and  sixty  in 
number,  and  rode  on  richly  caparisoned  steeds,  with 
golden  bits  and  shining  ornaments,  each  carrying  a 
golden  cup  in  his  right  hand  as  a  mark  of  his  office. 

As  these  coronation  processions,  however,  gradually 
increased  in  size  and  splendor,  it  was  soon  found 
impossible  to  accomplish  the  procession  and  the  coro- 
nation on  the  same  day.  It  became  customary,  there- 
fore, that  the  sovereign  should  proceed  in  state  from 
the  Tower  to  Westminster  the  day  previous  to  the 
coronation  and  spend  the  vigil  of  that  ceremony  at 
Westminster  Palace,  instead  of  as  formerly  within 
the  city.  Thus  the  procession  from  the  Tower  pre- 
ceding the  coronation  of  Richard  II.  occurred  on 
July  15,  1377,  while  that  august  function  took  place 
on  the  day  following.  This  coronation  had,  as  we 
have  seen,  been  attended  with  great  splendor.  The 
young  king  rode  on  a  richly  caparisoned  horse,  clothed 
iu  robes  of  spotless  white,  and  attended  by  a  multitude 
of  nobles,  knights  and  esquires ;  the  gutters  in  the 
streets  flowed  with  wine,  and  at  the  principal  thor- 
oughfares the  procession  was  stayed,  that  the  king 
might  witness  the  exhibition  of  pageants ;  that  of 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  271 

the  Goldsmiths  Company,  on  the  Cheap,  being  partic- 
ularly splendid  and  representing  a  castle,  from  the 
four  sides  of  which  wine  poured  as  from  a  fountain, 
while  damsels  in  white  dresses,  standing  on  the  towers, 
blew  gold  leaves  from  golden  horns  upon  the  king, 
and  sprinkled  the  ground  before  him  with  golden 
florins.  Succeeding  monarchs  were  attended  with  the 
same  solemn  state  on  this  great  occasion,  and  we  learn 
that  in  his  progress  from  the  Tower  to  Westminster 
Henry  IV.  was  attended  by  no  less  than  nine  hundred 
horses,  so  great  was  the  number  of  nobles,  knights 
and  esquires  who  accompanied  the  king. 

If  all  these  processions  and  pageants  had  been 
brilliant,  that  which  took  Henry  VIII.  and  Katherine 
of  Arragon  from  the  Tower  to  Westminster  was  the 
most  brilliant  of  them  all.  The  procession  was 
entirely  in  keeping  with  the  love  of  display  and 
gorgeous  pageantry  which  was  the  dominating  fashion 
of  the  age.  The  young  king,  who  rode  on  a  horse 
splendidly  caparisoned  with  purple  velvet,  embroidered 
in  gold  and  edged  with  ermine,  was  attired  in  a  mag- 
nificent robe  of  crimson  velvet,  encrusted  with 
diamonds,  rubies,  emeralds,  pearls  and  other  rich  and 
precious  stones.  The  queen  rode  in  a  litter,  covered 
and  richly  apparelled,  and  the  palfries  had  trappings 
of  white  and  gold.  She  was  attired  in  a  robe  of 
white  satin,  her  hair  hung  loosely  down  her  back, 
caught  up  at  intervals  and  intertwined  with  pearls 
and  jewels,  while  on  her  head  was  a  small  crown  of 


272  LONDON. 

precious  stones.  And  if  the  street  pageant  was  one 
of  until  then  unknown  magnificence,  the  coronation 
ceremony  at  Westminster  was  also  of  a  splendor  here- 
tofore unequalled.  Since  the  days  of  Edward  the 
Confessor,  who  applied  to  Pope  Nicholas  II.  to  issue 
a  rescript  making  Westminster  Abbey  the  future  place 
of  coronation  of  English  monarchs,  those  august  cere- 
monies had  always  taken  place  within  the  venerable 
edifice,  but  never  before  had  any  coronation  attained 
the  degree  of  spectacular  grandeur  which  characterized 
that  of  Henry  VIII.,  nor  ever  before  had  there  been 
so  brilliant  and  so  distinguished  an  assemblage.  The 
difficulty  attending  travel  did  not  admit  in  those 
days  of  the  attendance  of  foreign  princes  as  repre- 
sentatives of  brother  sovereigns,  as  is  customary  at 
similar  functions  at  the  present  day,  and  the  coronation 
of  Henry  VIII.  lacked  therefore  the  pomp  of  the 
presence  of  foreign  royalties  and  diplomatic  repre- 
sentatives, but  what  it  lacked  in  this  regard  it 
possessed  in  another.  Never  before  had  so  many 
peers  and  peeresses,  nobles,  knights,  esquires,  and  other 
persons  of  high  estate  and  high-born  dames,  been 
brought  together,  and  the  splendor  of  the  men's  attire 
and  that  of  the  dresses  of  the  women  made  the  scene 
one  of  great  and  varied  magnificence.  WTho  could 
have  thought  that  the  woman,  who  with  Henry 
shared  the  honors  of  the  occasion,  would  end  her  days 
in  solitude  and  silence,  repudiated  by  the  man  at 
whose  side  she  then  sat  enthroned  ? 


Nave,  Westminster  Abbey 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  TUDOBS.  273 

The  first  two  or  three  years  of  the  new  reign  were 
years  of  perfect  calm  and  peace.  Friendly  relations 
with  other  countries  were  maintained,  and  throughout 
the  kingdom  all  seemed  orderly  and  prosperous. 
Impatient,  however,  of  acquiring  a  distinction 
throughout  Europe  other  than  that  which  belonged  to 
him  in  virtue  of  his  birth,  his  position  and  his 
opulence,  Henry  VIII.  soon  involved  the  country  in 
a  series  of  foreign  wars,  which,  as  they  had,  however, 
little  or  no  influence  on  the  development,  civic  or 
commercial,  of  the  capital  city,  belong  exclusively  to 
the  general  history  of  the  nation,  and  have  little  part 
in  our  present  subject.  It  is  necessary,  nevertheless, 
to  follow  briefly  the  political  changes  of  the  times,  in 
order  that  we  may  have  a  proper  understanding  of 
the  conditions  which  led  to  one  of  the  greatest  revo- 
lutions which  ever  befell  the  city — the  suppression  of 
the  monastic  and  other  religious  establishments,  and 
the  sequestration  and  redistribution  of  their  holdings 
in  London  and  its  suburbs  into  lay  and  secular  hands. 

Henry  being,  as  we  have  seen,  anxious  to  show  his 
metal  in  the  pursuit  of  war,  looked  about  him  for  a 
reason  which  would  warrant  the  assumption  of  hostil- 
ities with  that  hereditary  enemy  of  England  across 
the  channel.  About  this  time  the  Holy  League  had 
been  formed  between  the  Pope,  the  emperor,  the  king 
of  Spain  and  the  republic  of  Venice  against  Louis 
XII.,  king  of  France.  Henry  at  once  joined  the 
league,  and,  summoning  a  Parliament,  demanded  an 
VOL.  I.— 18 


274  LONDON. 

appropriation  to  meet  the  expenses  of  the  war.  Un- 
fortunate though  he  was  at  first,  Henry  soon  triumphed 
over  his  reverses,  and  at  the  battle  of  Gninegate 
obtained  a  very  decided  advantage  over  the  French. 
The  siege  of  Tournai  followed,  which  city  surrendered  ; 
and  here  we  come  to  the  place  where  mention  must 
be  made  of  a  personage  who,  besides  figuring  promi- 
nently on  the  stage  of  English  history,  was  indirectly, 
though  most  intimately,  connected  with  the  transfor- 
mation which  London  was  soon  about  to  experience. 
This  man  was  no  less  a  personage  than  Thomas 
Wolsey,  dean  of  Lincoln  and  almoner  to  the  king, 
afterwards  cardinal,  chancellor  of  England  and  Arch- 
bishop of  York.  Said  to  be  the  son  of  a  butcher  at 
Ipswich,  Wolsey  was  educated  at  Oxford,  became  a 
fellow  of  Magdalen  College,  and  was  appointed  master 
of  the  college  school.  Having  obtained  the  post  of 
tutor  to  the  sons  of  the  Marquis  of  Dorset,  he  suc- 
ceeded in  securing  the  friendship  of  that  nobleman, 
who  offered  him  the  living  of  Lymington,  which 
Wolsey  accepted.  Having  been  appointed  chaplain 
to  Henry  VII.,  he  was  employed  in  the  secret  nego- 
tiations which  concerned  the  king's  marriage  with 
Margaret  of  Savoy.  Sent  by  the  king  as  ambassador 
to  the  emperor,  he  was  on  his  return  made  dean  of 
Lincoln  and  later  canon  of  Windsor.  On  the  acces- 
sion of  Henry  VIII.  he  was  introduced  to  the  young 
sovereign  by  Fox,  Bishop  of  AVinchester,  and,  having 
succeeded  in  making  himself  indisj)ensable  to  the 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  275 

king,  by  promoting  within  reason  and  conscience  all 
those  amusements  which  he  found  suitable  to  the  age 
and  temperament  of  the  youthful  monarch,  he  was 
made  a  member  of  the  king's  council,  and  soon  man- 
aged to  so  assert  his  superiority  as  to  become  chief 
minister.  When  Tournai  was  taken,  that  See  being 
without  incumbent,  it  was  conferred  upon  him.  Thus 
Wolsey  rose  rapidly,  and  was  fast  approaching  that 
unrivalled  power  and  splendor  which  he  finally  at- 
tained. 

In  the  negotiations  which  followed  to  establish 
peace  between  the  two  nations,  and  which  culminated 
in  the  marriage  of  the  Princess  Mary,  the  king's  sister, 
with  Louis  XII.,  Wolsey  was  greatly  instrumental. 
His  high  position  in  the  king's  confidence  made  him 
naturally  many  enemies,  but  by  playing  one  against 
the  other,  according  to  the  practice  of  the  times,  he 
was  able  to  successfully  maintain  his  ascendency  over 
the  king.  He  was  promoted  in  1514  to  the  See  of 
Lincoln;  and  the  year  following  was  made  Archbishop 
of  York,  and  on  the  resignation  of  the  great  seal  by 
Warham,  in  1515,  became  lord  chancellor  of  Eng- 
land. The  same  year  Leo  X.  granted  him  the  cardi- 
nal's hat,  and  he  thus  added  to  his  other  dignities 
the  eminent  title  of  "  Prince  of  the  Church."  No  pre- 
late ever  carried  to  a  greater  height  the  pomp  and 
dignity  of  office.  His  London  residence,  York  Place, 
afterwards  Whitehall,  was  the  centre  of  a  brilliant 
court.  Literature  and  the  arts,  then  in  their  infancy, 


276  LONDON. 

found  in  him  a  generous  patron,  and  all  who  were  dis- 
tinguished in  letters,  art  or  science  sought  an  intro- 
duction to  him  and  attended  his  levees.  Finally  Leo 
X.  appointed  him  his  legate  in  England,  and  he  thus 
obtained  the  right  of  holding  a  legatine  court,  and 
that  of  visitation  of  the  monasteries  and  other  relig- 
ious establishments. 

Europe  at  this  time  was  in  a  ferment  of  excite- 
ment and  agitation  over  Luther  and  the  "Refor- 
mation," and  while  Henry  VIII.,  who  had  been 
reared  in  the  strictest  piety,  went  so  far  as  to  write  a 
defence  of  the  Seven  Sacraments,  as  against  the  teach- 
ings advanced  by  Luther,  for  which  he  received  from 
Leo  X.  the  title  of  "  Defender  of  the  Faith,"  a  title 
still  borne  by  the  sovereigns  of  England,  yet  circum- 
stances arose  by  which,  a  few  years  later,  his  senti- 
ments towards  the  Papacy  came  to  be  entirely  re- 
versed. Though  Katherine  of  Arragou  had  been 
united  to  Henry  for  upwards  of  eighteen  years,  and 
had  borne  him  several  children,  yet  the  king  now 
commenced  to  express  those  doubts  which  he  said  he 
entertained  regarding  the  lawfulness  of  their  marriage 
tie.  These  doubts  the  king  based  on  the  Mosaic  law, 
which  threatens  with  childlessness  he  who  espouses 
his  brother's  widow.  Now  Katherine,  as  it  will  be 
remembered,  had  had  as  her  first  husband  Arthur, 
Prince  of  Wales,  the  king's  elder  brother,  and  while 
she  had  borne  Henry  several  children,  all  had  died  in 
infancy  save  the  Princess  Mary,  who  was  of  a  deli- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  277 

cate  constitution.  The  king  urged  that  the  doubts  as 
to  Mary's  legitimacy  might  in  the  future  seriously 
endanger  the  succession  of  the  crown.  The  truth  was, 
however,  that  the  king  had  already  fixed  his  affections 
on  a  woman  other  than  his  wife,  and  that  Anne 
Boleyu  was  already  the  mistress  of  his  heart. 

Inclination  and  policy  seeming  thus  to  concur,  the 
king  determined  to  dispatch  an  ambassador  to  Rome, 
to  lay  his  case  before  the  Pope.  His  selection  fell  on 
William  Knight,  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  who  not- 
withstanding his  protest  that  he  was  old,  and  that  his 
sight  was  failing,  was  compelled  to  depart  on  his  mis- 
sion. Clement  VII.,  who  then  occupied  the  chair  of 
Peter,  was  at  the  time  a  prisoner  of  the  Emperor 
Charles  V.  He  received  the  king's  ambassador  kindly 
at  Orvieto,  whither  he  had  escaped,  but  on  being 
pressed  to  give  an  answer  to  the  king's  request  for  an 
annulment  of  his  marriage,  he  demurred.  After 
many  negotiations  and  much  delay,  he  finally  agreed 
to  appoint  a  commission  to  look  into  the  matter,  and 
try  the  validity  of  the  marriage,  and  Cardinal  Cam- 
peggio  and  Cardinal  Wolsey  were  appointed  by  him 
as  judges  of  the  case. 

Cardinal  Campeggio  arrived  in  England  on  October 
7,  1528,  and  the  two  legates  opened  their  court  in 
London  on  May  31,  1529.  The  court  was  held  at 
Blackfriars — that  is,  in  the  hall  of  that  famous  Domin- 
ican priory — and  the  king  and  queen  were  cited  to  ap- 
pear before  it.  The  trial  was  spun  out  until  July  23, 


278  LONDON. 

on  which  day  Cardinal  Campeggio  prorogued  the 
court  until  October  1.  Henry,  who  had  been  eagerly 
expecting  a  verdict  in  his  favor,  was  naturally  much 
disappointed.  A  few  days  later  both  the  king  and 
the  queen  received  a  citation  to  appear  in  person  be- 
fore the  Pope  at  Rome,  that  he  might  himself  sit  in 
judgment  on  the  case.  This  was  received  by  Henry 
as  if  it  had  been  a  verdict  against  his  side  of  the  case, 
and  he  did  not  postpone  for  very  long  the  venting  of 
his  wrath  on  Wolsey,  in  which  line  of  conduct  he  was 
encouraged  by  the  ambitious  Anne  Boleyn  and  her 
friends,  who  dreaded  a  return  of  the  vast  power  and 
influence  which  the  cardinal  had  heretofore  exercised 
over  the  king.  On  October  9  of  the  same  year  an 
indictment  was  preferred  against  him  in  the  King's 
Bench,  for  breach  of  "  prsemunire,"  an  accusation 
based  on  his  acceptance  of  the  legatine  authority. 
The  great  seal  was  taken  from  him  and  delivered  to 
Sir  Thomas  More.  Wolsey  was  ordered  to  leave 
London;  his  residence  York  Place,  and  all  its  magnifi- 
cent furniture  and  plate,  were  seized,  and  he  was  com- 
manded to  retire  to  Esher,  a  country  seat  which  he 
possessed  near  Hampton  Court. 

On  the  meeting  of  Parliament,  which  had  not  been 
summoned  for  seven  years,  on  November  3  following, 
the  House  of  Lords  voted  a  charge  of  forty-four  arti- 
cles against  Wolsey.  The  articles  were  sent  down  to 
the  House  of  Commons,  where  he  was  valiantly  de- 
fended by  Thomas  Cromwell,  whom  he  had  raised 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOES.  279 

from  a  very  lowly  station  to  his  then  brilliant  posi- 
tion. The  end  of  the  drama  was  now  fast  approach- 
ing. While  permitted  to  retain  the  archiepiscopal 
See  of  York,  he  felt  that  it  was  only  a  temporary 
respite;  nor  was  he  wrong  in  his  surmise.  His 
enemies  continued  their  attack,  and,  feeling  unsafe 
while  he  lived,  urged  the  king  to  completely  destroy 
him.  On  November  4,  1530,  he  was  arrested  on  the 
trumped-up  charge  of  high  treason,  and  he  knew 
then  that  the  end  had  come.  Cited  to  appear  in 
London,  he  started  on  the  journey;  but  long  years 
of  toil  and  anxiety  had  completely  shattered  his 
health,  and  dysentery  setting  in,  he  could  make  but 
slow  progress.  On  Saturday,  November  26,  he 
reached  Leicester  Abbey,  and  feeling  that  he  was 
dying,  he  said  to  the  lord  abbot,  "  Father,  I  come  to 
leave  my  bones  among  you."  On  the  morning  of 
November  29  he  died,  and  all  that  was  left  of  that 
brilliant  genius  was  hurriedly  buried  in  a  plain  wooden 
coffin. 

The  death  of  "Wolsey  had  removed  from  the  scene 
one  of  the  most  ardent  defenders  of  the  papal  rights, 
and  one  of  the  greatest  barriers  which  existed  be- 
tween Henry  and  the  consummation  of  his  plans. 
His  first  move  was  to  cause  Parliament  to  declare 
him  the  protector  and  supreme  head  of  the  Church 
and  clergy  in  England,  and  by  strict  interpretation  of 
the  so-called  Statute  of  Provisors,  he  transferred  still 
more  of  the  hitherto  recognized  authority  of  the  Pope 


280  LONDON. 

to  his  own  person.  His  quarrel  with  the  Pope  was 
now  irreconcilable,  and  having  fully  determined  in 
his  own  mind  to  have  his  own  way  in  the  matter,  he 
caused  his  marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn,  whom  he  had 
previously  created  Marchioness  of  Pembroke,  to  be 
privately  celebrated  on  January  25,  1533.  Having 
first  compelled  Parliament  to  pass  an  act  prohibiting 
any  appeal  to  Rome  in  any  case  of  matrimony,  di- 
vorces, wills  or  other  suits  recognizable  in  the  ecclesi- 
astical courts,  he  then  called  upon  Cranmer,  who,  on 
the  death  of  Wareham,  had  succeeded  to  the  See  of 
Canterbury,  to  hold  a  court  to  inquire  into  the 
validity  of  his  marriage  with  Katherine  of  Arragon. 
That  the  sentence  would  be  in  favor  of  annulment 
was  a  foregone  conclusion,  and  on  May  28  Cranmer 
rendered  the  desired  decision.  By  a  subsequent  sen- 
tence he  ratified  the  king's  marriage  with  Anne  Bo- 
leyn, and  on  Whitsunday  following  she  was  crowned 
with  great  splendor  at  Westminster.  She  passed 
through  the  city  from  the  Tower  to  Westminster  in 
great  and  solemn  state,  having  gone  by  water  two 
days  before  from  Greenwich  to  the  Tower,  accompa- 
nied by  barges  containing  the  mayor,  the  aldermen, 
and  the  representatives  of  the  crafts  and  companies. 
The  procession  through  the  streets  was  one  of  the 
greatest  splendor,  and  nothing  was  left  undone  that 
would  lend  lustre  to  her  progress  or  her  subsequent 
coronation  at  Westminster. 

The  time  had  now  arrived  for  the  finishing  stroke 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  281 

which  was  at  one  blow  to  destroy  the  last  vestige  of 
papal  authority  in  England,  and  entirely  change  the 
character  and  aspect  of  London — the  suppression  of 
the  monasteries,  and  the  sequestration  of  their  vast 
holdings  and  other  property.  Already  some  of  the 
minor  monasteries  had  begun  to  feel  the  hand  of  the 
king.  The  work  that  was  completely  to  transform 
London  was  begun  on  May  11,  1531,  by  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  house  of  Augustinian  Canons  attached  to 
the  Elsyng  Hospital,  an  asylum  for  the  blind ;  and  a 
few  months  later  came  the  dissolution  of  the  venerable 
priory  at  Aldgate,  the  Holy  Trinity ;  the  canons  scat- 
tered among  other  houses  of  the  order,  and  the  prop- 
erty was  turned  over  to  Sir  Thomas  Audley,  who  had 
succeeded  Sir  Thomas  More  as  lord  chancellor.  On 
Audley's  death  the  property  passed  to  Thomas  How- 
ard, Duke  of  Norfolk,  who  had  married  his  daughter, 
and  after  Norfolk's  execution,  in  1572,  to  his  son,  the 
Earl  of  Suffolk,  who  sold  the  manor  house  and  pre- 
cinct to  the  city  of  London.  The  adjoining  chapel 
was  made  a  parish  church.  This  was  followed  shortly 
by  the  execution  of  Elizabeth  Barton,  the  so-called 
"  Holy  Maid  of  Kent,"  who,  with  two  monks  from 
the  cathedral  of  Canterbury,  two  friars  and  the  rec- 
tors of  one  of  London's  best-known  churches,  were 
hanged  and  beheaded.  It  was  but  the  first  of  a  series 
of  persecutions.  Three  Carthusian  priors,  including 
the  head  of  that  famous  institution,  the  London 
Charter  House  (Chartreuse),  and  six  friars,  were 


282  LONDON. 

hanged  and  quartered  at  Tyburn.  The  date  of  this 
tragedy  was  May  4,  1535.  The  head  of  the  last- 
mentioned  venerable  ecclesiastic  was  set  up  on  Lon- 
don Bridge,  while  one  of  his  limbs  was  put  up  over 
his  own  gateway — the  same  gateway  which  still 
forms  the  entrance  of  Charter  House  Square  —  and 
there  the  passing  crowd  could  gaze  upon  the  quiver- 
ing and  decomposing  flesh  of  the  aged  man  as  it 
rotted  and  fell  in  pieces  to  the  ground,  and  was  there 
devoured  by  hungry  dogs. 

The  same  year  Fisher  and  More  were  beheaded  on 
Tower  Hill,  and  what  one  of  the  most  eminent  Eng- 
lish historians  has  called  the  British  Terror  was  then 
fully  inaugurated.  Executions  were  now  pushed  with 
even  greater  vigor,  and  the  streets  of  London  wit- 
nessed long  processions  of  unfortunates  who — for  hav- 
ing incurred  the  royal  displeasure  by  refusing  to 
recognize  the  doctrine  of  "  royal  supremacy  "  in  eccle- 
siastical matters — were  hurried  to  their  common  fate, 
the  gallows  or  the  block. 

The  assumption  by  the  king  of  what  had  been 
previously  held  to  be  the  undisputed  rights  of  the  Pope 
placed  the  whole  English  ecclesiastical  world  at  his 
mercy.  The  end  of  the  monastic  system  and  of  the 
monasteries  was  now  at  hand.  That  wonderful  edifice 
which  it  had  taken  so  many  centuries  to  erect,  and 
which  had  grown  so  vast  and  powerful,  now  fell  to 
pieces,  like  a  house  of  cards.  Those  magnificent 
buildings  and  vast  estates,  which  had  become  the 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOES.  283 

pride  of  Christendom,  were  seized,  and  either  de- 
stroyed or  given  over  into  the  possession  of  some 
favorite  of  the  moment.  In  London  the  suppression 
of  the  monastic  establishments  left  unoccupied  some 
of  the  most  stately  edifices  and  some  of  the  most  valu- 
able land  areas  in  the  city.  Thus  Blackfriars,  White- 
friars,  Greyfriars,  St.  Martin-le-Grand,  Austin  Friars, 
Crutched  Friars,  and  innumerable  other  similar  great 
religious  establishments,  which  until  then  had  been 
like  small  cities  in  themselves,  peopled  by  a  crowd  of 
pious  and  devout  souls,  bent  on  their  various  missions 
of  love  and  charity,  now  became  untenanted  and 
threatened  with  destruction.  Some  of  the  greatest 
historical  landmarks  of  the  city  thus  disappeared. 

While  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that  no  abbeys  existed 
within  the  walls  of  the  city,  the  monks  having  inva- 
riably chosen  more  sheltered  and  secluded  situations, 
and  left  to  the  friars  the  selection  of  busier  localities, 
yet  many  houses  throughout  the  land  which  had 
mitred  abbots  and  abbesses  at  their  head  held  land 
in  London,  and  the  fall  of  Westminster  Abbey,  of 
Battle  Abbey,  of  Barking,  and  of  Bermondsey,  and 
of  others  even  further  from  the  city,  and  which  insti- 
tutions owned  large  properties  in  London,  was  in  a 
great  measure  due  to  the  seizure  and  the  sequestration 
of  these  estates.  By  the  time  that  the  year  1538  had 
come  to  be  inscribed  on  the  calendar  of  Christendom, 
the  transformation  was  complete,  and,  the  ecclesiastical 
world  being  entirely  routed  from  its  possessions,  the 


284  LONDON. 

division  of  the  spoils  began  in  earnest.  Besides  the 
ruin  of  so  many  splendid  buildings  and  the  sacrifice 
of  so  many  valuable  lives,  the  suppression  of  the 
religious  houses  worked  another  great  evil.  Many 
of  the  monasteries  and  nunneries  had  been  especially 
devoted  to  the  care  of  the  sick,  the  aged  and  the 
infirm,  and  their  suppression  left  their  patients  un- 
cared  for  and  quite  adrift  in  the  world.  The  blind 
at  Elsyng  Spittle,  the  halt  at  St.  Giles  and  the 
leprous  at  St.  Thomas  were  thrown  helpless  out  into 
the  world.  A  period  of  terrible  distress  and  misery 
followed.  The  streets  of  London  resounded  at  the 
same  time  to  the  cries  of  the  monks  and  nuns,  who, 
dragged  from  their  pious  retreats,  were  hurried  to 
their  death,  and  to  those  of  the  unfortunates,  who, 
deprived  of  their  caretaking  and  devoted  nurses,  cried 
out  in  loneliness  and  agony  throughout  the  city. 

The  evil  became  so  terrible  that  the  mayor,  alder- 
men and  common  council  addressed  a  joint  petition 
to  the  king,  praying  that  he  might  at  least  grant 
them  four  houses  in  which  they  could  house  and  shel- 
ter the  sick  and  the  starving.  Those  which  they 
thus  asked  for  were  "Saynt  Mary  Spytell,"  "Saynt 
Bartylmewes  Spytell,"  "Saynt  Thomas  Spytell"  and 
the  "New  Abbey  on  Tower  Hill."  Henry  VIII. 
was  far  too  engrossed,  however,  in  his  schemes  for 
the  appropriation  of  all  ecclesiastical  property  to  heed 
the  cries  to  which  his  attention  was  thus  called,  and 
the  petition  lay  unnoticed  for  some  eight  years  or 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  285 

more.  In  1544,  however,  the  civic  authorities  suc- 
ceeded in  obtaining  St.  Bartholomew  the  Great,  and 
the  hospital  was  refounded  by  Henry  VIII.,  who 
gave  it  a  new  charter,  which  returned  to  it  the  greater 
proportion  of  its  former  revenues,  "  for  the  continual 
relief  and  help  of  an  hundred  sore  and  diseased," 
being  "  moved  thereto  with  great  pity  for  and  towards 
the  relief  and  succor  and  help  of  the  poor,  aged, 
sick,  low  and  impotent  people,  .  .  .  lying  and  going 
about  begging  in  the  common  streets  of  the  city  of 
London,  and  the  suburbs  of  the  same,  infected  with 
divers  great  and  horrible  sicknesses  and  diseases."  In 
1546  Grey  friars  was  also  given  to  the  civic  authori- 
ties, and  an  elaborate  scheme  for  charity  on  an  exten- 
sive scale  was  formed,  by  which  the  church,  under 
the  appellation  of  Christ  Church,  was  to  be  made 
parochial,  and  the  neighboring  parishes  of  St.  Nicho- 
las Shambles  and  St.  Ewen  were  to  be  united  under 
two  clergymen,  one  a  vicar  and  the  other  to  be  called 
a  visitor.  The  plan  was,  however,  only  in  part  car- 
ried out.  The  former  Augustinian  priory  at  Bishops- 
gate  Without,  which  had  been  founded  by  one  Simon 
Fitz-Mary,  sheriff  of  London  in  1242,  was  in  1547 
also  turned  over  by  the  king  to  the  city  of  London, 
and  it  became  a  hospital  for  the  insane,  under  the 
name  of  the  Bethlehem  (Bedlam)  Royal  Hospital, 
Moorfields,  the  management  of  the  institution  being 
turned  over  ten  years  later  to  the  governors  of 
Bridewell  Hospital.  The  original  building,  though  it 


286  LONDON. 

escaped  the  great  fire  in  1666,  yet  was  shortly  after 
torn  down,  and  a  new  one  erected,  and  the  hospital 
was  finally  removed  to  its  present  quarters  in  St. 
George's  Fields,  Lambeth,  in  1815. 

Meanwhile  Henry  VIII.  had  possessed  himself  of 
York  House,  the  residence  of  the  late  cardinal,  chan- 
cellor and  favorite.  The  royal  palace  at  Westminster 
had  been  severely  damaged  by  the  great  fire  of  1512, 
and  the  king  found  its  accommodations  entirely  inade- 
quate and  inappropriate  to  his  own  use.  York  House 
was,  on  the  other  hand,  a  magnificent  building,  emi- 
nently suited  as  the  habitation  of  a  court.  Henry 
VIII.,  however,  caused  it  to  be  greatly  altered  and 
adapted,  and  somewhat  enlarged.  Here,  in  the  sump- 
tuous apartments  in  which  Wolsey  had  held  his  levees 
and  given  his  magnificent  entertainments,  and  where 
Henry  had  first  met  Anne  Boleyn,  the  king  now 
himself  resided  and  held  his  court.  The  Hospice  of 
St.  James,  an  institution  for  the  care  of  lepers,  having 
also  been  appropriated  by  Henry  to  his  own  use,  and 
the  lepers  turned  adrift  to  shift  for  themselves,  he 
converted  it,  notwithstanding  its  unpleasant  associa- 
tions, into  a  royal  residence,  and  the  park  belonging 
to  it  was  so  extended  as  to  meet  that  of  York  House. 
St.  James'  Palace  did  not,  however,  become  a  regular 
residence  of  English  royalty  for  some  years,  and 
Whitehall,  as  York  House  came  to  be  called,  re- 
mained through  several  reigns  the  London  residence 
of  English  monarchs,  though  Mary  rather  preferred 


St.  James  Palace 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  287 

and  eventually  died  at  St.  James.  To-day,  of  White- 
hall nothing  remains  save  the  so-called  banqueting 
house,  erected  by  Inigo  Jones,  the  statue  of  James  II., 
and  the  name  of  the  great  thoroughfare  called  White- 
hall, which  connects  Trafalgar  Square  and  the  Strand 
with  Westminster  Abbey. 

If  Henry  VIII.  gave  the  example  of  appropriation 
in  his  seizure  of  York  House,  he  was  not  slow  in 
granting  similar  privileges  to  his  favorites.  The 
Charter  House,  the  far-famed  Carthusian  Priory,  was, 
as  we  have  seen,  granted  to  Sir  Thomas  Audley,  then 
lord  chancellor.  Thomas  Cromwell,  then  "vicar 
general "  of  the  king,  was  rewarded  for  his  "  faithful 
services  "  by  the  gift  of  a  number  of  small  tenements 
adjoining  and  belonging  to  the  Augustinian  friars, 
which  he  caused  to  be  pulled  down,  and  upon  the  site 
of  which  he  erected  a  large  and  spacious  mansion. 
Not  satisfied  with  this,  however,  he  determined  to  ex- 
tend the  premises  in  the  neighborhood  of  what  was 
then  an  open  space,  but  came  subsequently  to  be 
known  as  Drapers'  Gardens.  To  accomplish  this,  he 
employed  the  simple  method  of  causing  to  be  pushed 
away  any  obstacles  which  might  happen  to  be  in  his 
way,  such  as  summer-houses,  fences,  out-houses  and 
the  like.  These  were  all  shoved  aside  as  if  mere 
debris  and  rubbish,  entirely  irrespective  of  any  prop- 
erty rights,  and  his  garden  enlarged  to  the  extent  de- 
sired. 

For  the  belfry  and  bells  of  St.  Paul's  churchyard — 


288  LONDON. 

that  is,  that  which  belonged  to  Jesus  Chapel,  attached 
to  St.  Faith's  under  St.  Paul's — Henry  VIII.  amused 
himself  playing  at  dice  with  Sir  Miles  Partridge. 
The  king  having  lost,  that  historic  tower  under  the 
shadow  of  which  so  many  public  events  of  import- 
ance occurred  was  demolished  and  the  bells  of  the  old 
belfry  melted  down  and  sold  by  order  of  their  new 
owner. 

In  1545  the  church  of  Whitefriars  and  the  steeple 
of  the  church  of  Blackfriars  suffered  much  the  same 
fate  as  the  belfry  of  St.  Faith's,  and  were  torn  down 
by  vandal  hands.  The  same  year  the  beautiful  choir 
of  the  same  church  suffered  destruction.  The  splen- 
did oaken  stalls  wrere  wrenched  out  violently  and  sold 
to  the  first  bidder,  being  actually  knocked  down  by 
the  auctioneer  for  the  miserable  sum  of  fifty  pounds. 
The  church  of  the  Augustinian  or  Austin  friars  ex- 
perienced the  same  fate.  The  pages  of  contemporary 
chroniclers  are  filled  with  accounts  of  denuding  of 
sanctuaries,  despoiling  of  churches,  destruction  of 
venerable  monuments,  and  the  ruin  of  ancient  houses 
and  other  historic  landmarks.  The  alterations  made 
in  the  aspect  of  the  city  by  all  these  sad  and  distress- 
ing changes  was,  as  will  easily  be  understood,  very 
great  and  unfortunate.  Only  a  few  traces  of  the  old 
London  were  left  to  posterity.  The  choir  of  St. 
Bartholomew  the  Great  escaped,  and  still  stands  to- 
day, a  splendid  example  of  Norman  architecture,  and 
some  traces  of  the  ancient  cloisters  may  be  found  eni- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  289 

bedded,  as  it  were,  in  the  adjacent  buildings  of  the 
neighboring  alleys  and  lanes ;  but  of  those  huge  con- 
ventual establishments,  Blackfriars  and  Whitefriars, 
nothing  but  the  name  remains. 

The  fate  of  the  city  also  befell  the  suburbs.  The 
age  of  monasteries  and  sheltered  gardens  gave  way  to 
that  of  parks  and  palaces.  Westminster  Abbey  itself 
suffered,  it  is  true,  but  few  changes  at  the  time  of  the 
dissolution  of  the  monastic  houses.  It  has  perhaps 
experienced  greater  changes  in  the  alterations  of  the 
last  two  centuries.  The  abbey  itself,  however,  was 
suppressed  and  the  monks  scattered.  An  act  of  Par- 
liament, passed  in  1 536,  had  already  granted  to  West- 
minster the  style  of  city.  It  remained  for  Henry  VIII. 
in  1 540  to  create  it  a  See ;  thus,  while  depriving  West- 
minster of  its  abbot,  he  gave  it  a  bishop,  and  though 
the  newly-erected  See  was  abolished  in  1 550,  ten  years 
later,  yet  it  has  continued  to  retain  its  civic  title,  and 
in  an  act  passed  at  Westminster  in  1604  we  find  it 
described  as  the  "  manor  and  city  of  Westminster." 
The  abbot  was  replaced  by  a  dean,  and  a  chapter  of 
twelve  canons  established.  The  abbot's  house  went 
as  spoils  to  the  omnivorous  Lord  Wentworth,  the 
other  buildings  being  variously  distributed.  It  is 
not  surprising,  considering  the  changes  thus  effected, 
that  Henry  VIII.  preferred  his  residence  at  Whitehall 
to  that  which  he  had  occupied  at  Westminster;  for  if 
he  retained  the  slightest  feeling  or  sentiment,  it  would 
certainly  have  been  difficult  for  him  to  have  resided 
VOL.  I.— 19 


290  LONDON. 

comfortably  amid  the  shrines  which  he  had  caused  to 
be  demolished,  the  chapels  which  he  had  caused  to  be 
disendowed,  and  near  to  the  graves  of  his  father  and 
mother,  whom  he  had  deprived  of  the  services  which 
they  had  deemed  necessary  to  the  peaceful  repose  of 
their  souls,  and  had  endeavored  to  secure  by  so  many 
safeguards.  Their  son,  who  had  on  his  accession  re- 
ceived the  renewed  oath  of  the  abbot  of  Westminster 
to  provide  the  accustomed  masses  for  the  repose  of  the 
souls  of  his  royal  parents,  now  deprived  the  abbot  of 
his  title  and  his  parents  of  their  masses.  A  few  of 
the  ancient  observances  continued,  it  is  true,  to  be 
celebrated  in  the  chapel  of  Henry  VII.  until  the 
death  of  Henry  VIII.,  but  even  these  ceased  on  the 
accession  of  Edward  VI.  The  fate  of  Westminster 
was  also  shared  by  the  abbey  of  Bermondsey,  Surrey, 
but  this  great, historic  pile  suffered  more  severely  and 
was  laid  low. 

The  king  had  now  accomplished  his  purpose,  but 
let  it  not  be  supposed  that  he  enjoyed  in  perfect  peace 
and  tranquillity  the  fruits  of  his  plunder  and  vio- 
lence; nor  did  Anne  Boleyn,  the  partner  and  possibly 
in  a  large  measure  the  instigator  of  his  operations.  In 
1536  the  long-expected  heir  appeared,  but  she  was  de- 
livered of  him  dead.  This  did  not,  as  may  be  imag- 
ined, have  the  effect  of  appeasing  the  anger  of  the 
king,  which  had  been  inflamed  against  her  by  the  in- 
sinuations of  the  Viscountess  de  Rochefort,  the  wife 
of  the  queen's  brother.  Meanwhile  Jane,  daughter 


LONDON  UNDEE  THE  TUDORS.  291 

of  Sir  John  Seymour,  a  young  lady  of  singular  beauty 
and  talent,  and  who  was  a  maid  of  honor  of  the  queen, 
had  completely  captivated  the  king's  fancy.  This 
probably  led  him  to  lend  a  much  more  willing  ear  to 
those  persons  who  hinted  at  unpleasant  things  in  con- 
nection with  the  queen's  virtue.  However  this  may 
have  been,  Anne  Boleyn  was  sent  to  the  Tower,  on 
May  2,  1536,  with  four  of  her  alleged  paramours, 
Boureton,  Norris,  Smeton  and  Weston,  who  were  tried 
and  executed.  The  queen  herself  was  tried  by  a  jury 
of  peers,  over  which  her  own  uncle,  the  Duke  of  Nor- 
folk, presided  as  lord  high  steward.  Her  condemna- 
tion was  a  foregone  conclusion,  and  on  May  9  of  the 
same  year  the  woman  who  had  been  the  cause  of  all 
the  misery  of  Katherine  of  Arragon,  who  had  de- 
stroyed a  home  and  almost  wrecked  a  kingdom,  paid 
by  her  death  at  the  block  the  penalty  of  her  folly. 
Though  probably  more  weak  and  vain  than  deter- 
minedly wicked,  her  fate  excited  but  little  commiser- 
ation, and  the  king,  not  content  with  the  severity  of 
her  punishment,  obtained  from  Cranmer,  then  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  a  sentence  of  annulment  of  his 
marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn,  and  had  her  offspring 
declared  illegitimate. 

The  day  after  Anne  Boleyn's  execution  the  king 
caused  his  marriage  with  Jane  Seymour  to  be  cele- 
brated. Katherine  of  Arragon  had  died  on  January 
7.  Jane  bore  him  one  son  afterwards,  Edward  VI., 
and  died  a  few  days  later.  But  London  was  still  to 


292  LONDON. 

enjoy  a  number  of  marriage  and  funeral  pageants,  for 
Jane's  death  was  followed  within  a  few  months  by 
Henry's  marriage  with  Anne,  Princess  of  Cleves. 
This  marriage  was  annulled  in  July,  1540,  on  the 
ground  of  her  having  been  previously  contracted  for. 
These  events  were  followed  on  July  28,  1540,  by  the 
king's  marriage  with  Katherine  Howard,  niece  of  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk,  which,  though  it  may  have  been 
viewed  by  the  Catholics  as  more  favorable  to  their 
cause,  could  not  have  been  regarded  by  them  but  with 
disgust  and  aversion,  considering  that  Henry  already 
had  one  wife  living  in  the  person  of  Anne  of  Cleves. 
Katherine  Howard  did  not,  however,  long  enjoy  her 
new  honors;  for,  accused  of  adultery,  Culpeper  and  Dir- 
ham,  said  to  be  her  lovers,  were  tried  and  executed 
December  10,  1541.  Her  own  trial  followed,  with 
that  of  the  Viscountess  de  Rochefort,  who  had  been 
the  means  of  bringing  the  queen  and  her  lovers 
together.  Both  were  condemned  and  beheaded  at 
the  Tower,  February  13,  1542.  The  year  follow- 
ing Henry  married  his  sixth  wife,  Katherine  Parr, 
daughter  of  Sir  Thomas  Parr,  of  Kendal,  widow  of 
Lord  Latimer,  a  woman  of  virtue,  but  of  such  radical 
views  in  matters  of  religion  that  the  king,  who, 
though  arrogating  to  himself  the  highest  ecclesias- 
tical functions  and  prerogatives,  yet  was  distinctly 
conservative  as  regarded  Catholic  doctrine,  became 
seriously  displeased  with  her;  but  her  tact  and  caution 
saved  her,  and  she  managed  to  outlive  her  husband. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOES.  293 

If  Katherine  Parr  had  succeeded  in  escaping  the 
fate  which  had  overtaken  two  of  her  predecessors, 
London  was  yet  to  be  witness  and  the  Tower  the 
scene  of  other  bloody  executions.  Catholics  and 
Protestants  were  conveyed  in  the  same  hurdles  to 
execution — Abel,  Featherstone  and  Powell  for  deny- 
ing the  royal  supremacy ;  Barnes,  Gerard  and  Jerome 
for  denying  the  six  articles.  Even  the  venerable 
Countess  of  Salisbury,  that  princess  who  was  the 
descendant  of  a  long  line  of  English  monarchs,  suf- 
fered the  death  penalty,  as  the  mother  of  the  king's 
kinsman,  Reginald,  Cardinal  Pole,  and  later  Papal 
legate  in  England.  The  Duke  of  Norfolk  and  his 
son,  the  Earl  of  Surrey,  were  now  seized  and  con- 
veyed to  the  Tower,  accused  of  a  conspiracy  against 
the  crown — a  purely  trumped-up  charge,  based  on 
the  fact  that  they  had  assumed  without  permission 
the  arms  of  Edward  the  Confessor.  Surrey,  being  a 
commoner,  his  trial  was  more  expeditious.  Con- 
demned for  high  treason,  he  was  executed  on  January 
19,  1547.  The  trial  of  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  was, 
however,  delayed  by  a  series  of  circumstances ;  and 
the  delay  saved  his  life.  The  king  was  himself  fast 
approaching  his  end,  and,  fearing  lest  he  should  die 
before  the  execution  of  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  he 
urged  the  Commons  to  hasten  the  bill  of  attainder, 
and  issued  orders  for  the  execution  on  the  morning 
of  January  28,  1547.  News  having  reached  the 
Tower,  however,  that  the  king  himself  had  died  that 


294  LONDON. 

morning,  the  execution  was  delayed,  and  the  life  of 
the  illustrious  nobleman  saved  thereby.  That  a  man 
guilty  of  so  many  crimes  should  have  been  able  to 
die  in  apparent  peace  is  certainly  to  be  wondered  at. 
The  king's  end,  however,  was  quiet.  Cranmer,  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  who  was  by  his  side,  requested 
that  the  king,  who  was  then  speechless,  should  give 
him  some  sign  of  his  faith  in  Christ.  Henry  squeezed 
that  prelate's  hand,  and  immediately  expired. 

If  great  had  been  the  political  chaos,  and  conse- 
quent financial  and  commercial  depression,  which  had 
characterized  the  later  Plantagenet  reigns,  while  the 
country  and  the  city  were  torn  asunder  by  Lancas- 
trian and  Yorkist  disputes,  great  also  was  the  impetus 
given  to  affairs  in  general,  and  business  enterprises  in 
particular,  by  the  accession  of  that  popular  hero, 
Henry  VII.;  for  not  only  did  confidence  return  to 
the  people,  but  that  monarch  gave  every  evidence  of 
his  personal  interest  in  the  progress  of  all  commercial 
interests.  In  fact,  four  of  the  city  companies  are 
indebted  to  him  for  their  charters  of  incorporation — 
the  Bakers,  who  received  theirs  as  early  in  the  reign 
as  1486;  the  Coopers,  to  whom  a  charter  was  granted 
in  1501,  by  which  the  right  was  given  them  to  search 
and  gauge  all  beer,  ale  and  soap  vessels  within  the 
city  of  London  and  two  miles  round  the  suburbs,  for 
doing  which  they  were  to  pay  a  farthing  for  each 
cask;  the  Poulterers  in  1504;  and  lastly,  though  by 
no  means  leastly,  that  great  company,  the  Merchant 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOES.      295 

Tailors,  whose  working  charter  bears  also  the  signa- 
ture of  the  hero  king.  Henry  VIII.  was  far  too 
busy  with  his  ecclesiastical  spoliation  schemes  to  oc- 
cupy himself  much  with  the  city  companies.  Still 
the  Innholders  managed  to  obtain  a  charter  from  him 
in  the  early  part  of  the  reign. 

If  many  ecclesiastical  foundations  owe  their  destruc- 
tion, one  there  is  that  owes  its  foundation  to  Henry 
VIII.  This  foundation  is  the  church  and  inde- 
pendent parish  of  St.  Martin-in-the- Fields;  for, 
though  it  had  existed  as  a  parish  as  early  as  the 
middle  of  the  fifteenth  century,  yet  until  1535  it  was 
dependent  upon  St.  Margaret's,  Westminster.  It  can- 
not be  said  that  the  king  was  entirely  unselfish  in  the 
new  arrangement  of  which  he  was  the  author;  for  it 
is  given,  as  the  rather  surprising  and  extraordinary 
reason  for  his  benevolence  in  the  matter,  that  the 
parishioners,  having  "no  parish  church,  did  resort  to 
the  parish  church  of  St.  Margaret's,  in  Westminster, 
and  were  thereby  found  to  bring  their  bodies  by  the 
court  gate  of  Whitehall,  which  the  said  Henry  then 
misliking  caused  the  church  in  the  parish  of  St. 
Martin-in-the-Fields  to  be  there  erected  and  made  a 
parish  there." 

Of  other  institutions  for  which  the  initiative  was 
taken  in  the  reign,  St.  Paul's  School  merits  perhaps, 
not  only  chronologically,  but  for  other  considerations, 
the  first  place.  This  famous  institution,  which  stood 
formerly  on  the  east  side  of  St.  Paul's  churchyard, 


296  LONDON. 

was  founded  in  1512  for  one  hundred  and  fifty-three 
"poor  men's  children,"  by  Dr.  John  Colet,  dean  of 
St.  Paul's,  the  friend  of  Erasmus  and  son  of  Sir 
Henry  Colet,  mercer,  and  lord  mayor  in  1486  and 
1 495.  The  boys  were  to  be  admitted  without  restric- 
tion as  to  position  or  country,  and  were  to  be  taught 
free  of  any  charge.  The  number,  one  hundred  and 
fifty-three,  was  selected  in  allusion  to  the  number  of 
fishes  caught  by  St.  Peter.  The  education,  which 
was  to  be  strictly  classical,  was  to  be  dispensed  by  a 
master,  submaster  and  chaplain,  and  the  presentations 
were  to  be  in  the  gift  of  the  master  of  the  Mercers' 
Company.  The  original  building  was  destroyed  in 
the  great  fire  of  1666,  but  another  was  erected  in  its 
place  on  the  same  site.  A  new  structure  was  put  up 
in  1823.  The  present  school  is  near  Addison  Road 
Station,  West  Kensington,  where  the  Mercers'  Com- 
pany purchased  sixteen  acres,  and  in  1880  erected  a 
new  schoolhouse,  from  the  design  of  Barnes  Wil- 
liams. The  school  to-day  has  the  care  of  one  thou- 
sand boys.  Some  of  the  most  eminent  of  scholars 
have  owed  their  training  to  this  institution,  and 
among  the  number  have  been  John  Leland,  the  anti- 
quary; Sir  Anthony  Denny,  the  "friend"  of  Henry 
VIII. ;  William  Whitaker,  master  of  St.  John's  Col- 
lege, Cambridge;  William  Camden,  the  great  anti- 
quary ;  John  Milton  ;  the  great  Duke  of  Marlborough ; 
Robert  Nelson,  the  author  of  "  Fasts  and  Festivals;" 
Edmund  Halley,  the  astronomer ;  Samuel  Pepys,  the 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOES.  297 

diarist ;  John  Strype,  the  ecclesiastical  historian  •  Sir 
Frederick  Pollock,  Lord  Chancellor  Truro  and  others. 

Another  institution  of  much  interest,  though  less 
importance,  since  it  was  suppressed  on  the  dissolution 
of  the  ecclesiastical  establishments,  was  the  Hospital 
and  Free  School  of  St.  Anthony,  which  stood  oppo- 
site Finch  Lane,  in  Threadneedle  Street,  where  the 
French  church  afterwards  stood.  Archbishop  Heath, 
Archbishop  Whitgift,  Sir  Thomas  More  and  other 
eminent  men  were  educated  at  this  school.  The  insti- 
tution possessed,  among  others,  one  very  singular 
privilege.  The  city  laws  concerning  food  were,  as  is 
known,  very  strict  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  all  un- 
wholesome meat  was  rigorously  destroyed.  All  swine 
"found  in  the  street,"  or  in  the  fosses,  or  in  the 
suburbs,  were  to  be  killed ;  but  those  pigs  found  in  the 
street  which  were  unfit  for  the  shambles  it  became 
customary  to  hand  over  to  the  proctor  of  St.  An- 
thony's Hospital,  who  fastened  a  bell  to  the  neck  of 
each,  and  sent  them  forth  again  to  find  their  own 
living.  This  time  they  were,  however,  "privileged 
pigs,"  and  protected  from  all  hindrance  or  interfer- 
ence ;  for  it  was  distinctly  ordered  that  all  pigs  bear- 
ing a  St.  Anthony's  bell  should  be  permitted  to  roam 
and  root,  unmolested  and  undisturbed,  until  they  were 
fat  enough,  when  they  were  killed  for  the  benefit  of 
the  hospital. 

Trinity  House  owes  its  inception  to  Sir  Thomas 
Spert,  comptroller  of  the  navy  under  Henry  VIII.,  and 


298  LONDON. 

he  it  was  who  was  appointed  its  first  master.  The  date 
of  incorporation  is  March  20,  1514.  The  corporation 
was  made  to  consist  of  a  master,  deputy-master,  war- 
dens, assistants  and  elder  brethren,  and  had  as  its 
object  the  increase  and  encouragement  of  navigation, 
the  regulation  of  lighthouses  and  sea  marks,  the 
securing  of  a  body  of  skilled  and  efficient  pilots  for 
the  navy  and  mercantile  service,  and  the  management 
and  regulation  of  all  matters  not  actually  connected 
with  the  admiralty.  The  old  hall  at  Deptford  in 
which  the  corporation  met  was  pulled  down  in  1787, 
and  replaced  by  a  building  which  is  still  standing. 
Their  present  London  headquarters,  on  the  north  side 
of  Tower  Hill,  was  erected  in  1793-1795,  from  the 
designs  of  Samuel  "VVyatt.  It  consists  of  a  main  body 
and  wings  of  an  Ionic  order  on  a  rusticated  basement. 
Over  the  windows  are  medallions,  with  portraits  in 
low  relief  of  George  III.  and  his  consort,  Charlotte 
of  Mecklenburgh-Strelitz,  and  others  representing 
lighthouses  and  other  emblematic  devices. 

Whatever  harshness  and  cruelty  there  may  have 
remained  in  the  methods  of  the  first  two  Tudor 
reigns,  there  can  be  no  question  but  that  the  man- 
ners became  during  these  much  more  polished  and 
courtly  and  less  martial  than  they  had  been  under 
previous  dynasties.  Not  only  did  much  more  enter- 
taining occur  at  court,  but  Margaret,  Queen  of  Scot- 
land, sister  of  Henry  VIII.,  held  quite  a  court  of 
her  own  at  Scotland  Yard,  opposite  Whitehall,  where 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  299 

she  was  pleased  to  extend  her  distinguished  patronage 
to  all  those  who  either  in  public  or  private  life  had 
attained  any  distinction.  To  Wolsey  is  perhaps  due 
the  introduction  into  England  of  the  formal  and  sys- 
tematic mode  of  entertaining.  His  dinners  and  levees 
at  York  House  were  the  height  and  perfection  of  the 
elegance  then  known,  and  his  example  was  emulated 
by  others  socially  and  politically  ambitious.  Indeed, 
Sir  Thomas  More,  at  Beaufort  House,  Chelsea,  and 
the  Earl  of  Bedford,  at  Worcester  House,  on  the 
Strand,  gave  large  and  splendid  entertainments,  and 
well  earned  their  merited  reputation  for  hospitality. 
But  though  the  Strand  had  been  paved  in  1532,  it 
being  then  "  full  of  pits  and  sloughs,  very  perilous 
and  noisome,"  yet  it  had  not  attained  that  high  degree 
of  popularity  which  rendered  it  during  subsequent 
reigns  the  favorite  residential  quarter  of  fashionable 
society.  Tower  Hill  was  in  those  days  still  a  dis- 
tinctly fashionable  locality.  The  French  ambassador 
resided  there,  and  Lumley  House,  the  residence  of  Sir 
Thomas  Wyatt,  was  there  situated,  it  having  been 
erected  on  a  plot  of  ground  which  had  formerly  be- 
longed to  the  Crutched  Friars. 

Though  in  one  sense  the  manners  had  changed,  yet 
it  is  nevertheless  true  that  a  certain  barbarity  still 
obtained,  which  barbarity  is  best  exemplified  by  the 
fact  that  a  cockpit  adjoined  Whitehall,  the  king's 
palace,  just  as  to-day  every  well-equipped  mansion 
possesses  a  billiard  hall.  Indeed,  cock-fighting  was 


300  LONDON. 

still  a  fashionable  method  of  entertaining  one's  guests 
after  a  banquet ;  nor  did  the  ladies  disdain  on  occa- 
sion to  participate  in  the  exciting  sport.  What  was 
done  by  the  court  and  the  nobility  was,  of  course,  ako 
practiced  by  the  lesser  world,  and  not  only  were  the 
amusements  of  fashionable  life  emulated,  but  the 
method  of  life  copied.  The  most  conspicuous  example 
of  this  is  found  perhaps  in  the  case  of  one  Jasper 
Fisher,  a  freeman  of  the  Goldsmiths'  Company  and  a 
justice  of  the  peace,  who  caused  to  be  erected  in 
Devonshire  Square,  Bishopsgate  Street,  a  palatial 
residence,  with  gardens,  bowling-alleys  and  other  ap- 
purtenances, and  there  lived  in  such  magnificence  that 
the  palace  obtained  the  name  of  "  Fisher's  Folly,"  by 
which  it  continued  to  be  known.  It  came  later  into 
the  possession  of  the  Earl  of  Oxford,  who  here  enter- 
tained Queen  Elizabeth;  and  it  became  subsequently 
the  residence  of  Sir  Roger  Manars.  In  the  reign  of 
James  I.  it  had  become  the  property  of  the  Camp- 
bells, from  whom  it  passed  to  the  Hamiltons.  Under 
Charles  II.  the  old  Countess  of  Devonshire  resided 
within  its  spacious  walls,  and  there  entertained  both 
the  king  and  his  august  consort.  In  1670  it  was 
seized  under  the  "  Act  for  the  Suppression  of  Conven- 
ticles," and  was  one  of  the  places  "  appointed  to  be 
used  every  Lord's  day  for  the  celebration  of  divine 
worship."  It  was  used  as  a  Baptist  chapel  until  1870, 
when  the  parishioners  removed  to  a  new  building  at 
Stoke  Newington,  the  building  in  Devonshire  Square 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  TUDORS.  301 

being  acquired  by  the   Metropolitan  Railway  Com- 
pany. 

Popular  amusements  and  popular  customs  do  not 
change  as  rapidly  or  as  easily  as  the  habits  of  fashion- 
able society.  Indeed  culture,  such  as  it  was,  was  lim- 
ited to  the  very  few.  There  are  not  many  names  by 
which  to  conjure  with  during  this  period.  It  is  true 
that  Caxton  had  in  1491  produced  his  first  printed 
work  at  the  Almonry,  Tothill  Street,  while  the  guest 
of  the  abbot  of  Westminster ;  and  that  Holbein  was 
much  esteemed  and  feted,  the  great  artist  being,  in 
fact,  an  honored  guest  at  the  king's  palace  at  White- 
hall. We  have  also  the  names  of  Roger  Ascham  and 
William  Cecil,  but  very  few  others  besides.  The 
people  still  had  the  same  rough  amusements  and 
rougher  existence,  and  the  condition  of  the  streets, 
which  are  described  as  "  full  of  pits  and  sloughs,  very 
perilous  and  noisome,"  not  to  speak  of  the  peregrina- 
tions of  St.  Anthony's  pigs,  could  not  have  been  con- 
ducive to  what  the  French  would  call  "  la  vie  de  la 
rue"  A  great  change  came  over  the  aspect  of  the 
city  under  the  reigns  which  were  to  follow. 


302  LONDON. 


CHAPTER    VIII. 

LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS  (CONTINUED). 

Edward  VI. — The  Duke  of  Somerset  made  Protector — The  Building 
of  Somerset  House — The  Bridewell  Asylum — The  Founding  of 
Christ's  Hospital — The  "  Blue  Coat "  Boys — South wark  made  a 
Ward  Without — The  Lady  Jane  Dudley  Incident — Accession 
of  Mary — Cardinal  Pole,  the  Pope's  Legate — The  Triumph  of 
Elizabeth — The  Opening  of  the  Royal  Exchange — The  Estab- 
lishment of  Doctor's  Commons — The  Tragedy  of  Fotheringay — 
London's  Part  in  the  Defence  Against  the  Spanish  Armada — 
The  Founding  of  Westminster  School — The  Merchant  Tailors' 
School— The  Establishment  of  Gresham  College — Social  Side 
of  the  Elizabethan  Period — The  Strand  a  Fashionable  Locality 
— Cecil  House — Arundel  House — Russell  House — Salisbury 
House — The  Social  Status  of  Finsbury — Great  Names  in  Liter- 
ature—The Birth  of  the  Theatre— State  of  the  Taverns— The 
Mitre,  in  Cheap — The  Boar's  Head,  in  East  Cheap — Bankside— 
The  Nag's  Head,  in  Southwark. 

HENRY  VIII.  had  in  1544  caused  Parliament  to 
pass  an  act  by  which  the  heirs  male  of  his  body  were 
to  be  preferred  to  the  heirs  female,  at  the  same  time 
restoring  the  two  princesses,  Mary  and  Elizabeth,  to 
the  succession.  By  this  act,  Edward,  his  son  by  Jane 
Seymour,  succeeded  him  as  Edward  VI.  This  prince 
being,  however,  only  in  his  tenth  year,  Henry  VIII. 
had  by  his  last  will  and  testament  appointed  sixteen 
executors,  to  whom  during  the  young  king's  minority 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  303 

the  government  of  the  kingdom  was  entrusted.  With 
these  executors,  who  included  Cranmer,  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  Wriothesley,  lord  chancellor,  and 
Hereford,  lord  chamberlain,  there  were  also  appointed 
twelve  counsellors,  who,  while  possessing  no  immedi- 
ate power,  were  to  assist  the  king's  executors  in  their 
deliberations.  The  first  act  of  the  combined  tribunal 
absolutely  defeated  the  king's  intentions,  for  they  im- 
mediately appointed  Edward,  Earl  of  Hereford,  the 
king's  maternal  uncle,  protector  of  the  realm  and 
governor  of  the  king's  person.  Desirous  of  supply- 
ing the  place  of  those  peerages  which  had  fallen  by 
attainder  and  failure  of  issue,  the  late  king  had  before 
his  demise  made  a  new  creation  of  nobility,  and  raised 
to  higher  rank  in  the  peerage  a  number  of  those  who 
were  already  included  in  that  body.  Thus  Wriothe- 
sley became  Earl  of  Southampton,  Lisle  Earl  of 
Warwick,  Sir  Thomas  Seymour,  brother  of  the  pro- 
tector, Baron  Seymour  of  Sudeley,  and  the  protector 
himself  Duke  of  Somerset. 

Somerset's  ambition  now  knew  absolutely  no  bounds. 
He  obtained  from  Edward  VI.  a  patent  entirely  re- 
versing the  will  of  the  late  king,  and  granting  him  full 
regal  powers.  Having  now  reached  the  height  of  his 
ambition,  he  felt  that  the  dignity  and  the  exaltation 
of  his  position  required  that  he  should  reside  in  a 
palace  of  regal  proportions  and  in  keeping  with  the 
high  authority  with  which  he  had  been  entrusted. 
He  commenced  therefore  iu  1549  the  building  of 


304  LONDON. 

Somerset  House,  which  he  determined  should  be  the 
largest  and  most  magnificent  residence  in  England. 
Two  Inns  appertaining  to  the  See  of  Worcester  and 
Lichfield,  and  which  were  situated  on  the  Strand, 
were  pulled  down  to  make  way  for  it,  and  the  great 
cloister  on  the  north  side  of  St.  Paul's,  containing  the 
famous  "Dance  of  Death,"  as  well  as  the  priory 
church  of  the  knights  hospitallers  of  St.  John  of  Jeru- 
salem at  Clerkenwell,  were  demolished  to  find  stones 
wherewith  to  erect  it.  Unfortunately,  but  few  men 
are  permitted  to  attain  their  heart's  desire,  and  he  did 
not  live  to  see  its  completion.  The  wondrous  pile  had 
hardly  commenced  to  rear  its  outline  against  the  Eng- 
lish sky  before  his  reign  of  authority  was  brought  to 
an  abrupt  and  tragic  close.  Once  the  regal  authority 
was  invested  in  him,  he  paid  but  little  heed  or  atten- 
tion to  the  opinion  of  the  executive  and  councillor 
board  appointed  by  the  late  king.  He  alienated  the 
support  of  the  nobility  by  courting  the  people,  de- 
stroyed his  own  popularity  with  the  latter  by  the 
pomp  and  extravagance  of  his  mode  of  life,  and  in- 
curred the  bitter  enmity  of  the  Catholics  by  pulling 
down  churches  to  obtain  the  materials  for  the  erection 
of  the  gigantic  structure  which  he  destined  as  his  resi- 
dence. Things  grew  rapidly  from  bad  to  worse,  until 
he  was  left  without  supporters.  A  league  was  now 
formed  against  him,  and  he  was  finally  .seized  and  con- 
fined in  the  Tower;  but,  having  asked  the  pardon  of 
those  associates  whose  rights  he  had  disregarded,  he 


Somerset  House 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOKS.  305 

temporarily  regained  his  liberty.  This,  however,  he 
did  not  enjoy  long.  He  was  tried  for  high  treason, 
condemned  and  executed  on  the  scaffold  on  Tower 
Hill  on  January  22,  1552.  The  king's  health  was 
very  delicate  and  he  did  not  long  survive  him,  and  a 
little  over  a  year  later,  on  July  6,  1553,  his  royal 
charge  passed  away  at  Greenwich,  in  the  sixteenth 
year  of  his  age  and  the  seventh  of  his  reign. 

The  metamorphosis  which  had  begun  in  London 
during  the  last  reign  progressed  to  its  conclusion ;  nor 
was  the  religious  persecution  in  any  way  abated.  Ex- 
ecution followed  execution  with  terrible  rapidity.  It 
soon  came  to  be  absolutely  imperative  that  some  order 
should  be  established  in  place  of  the  frightful  chaos 
which  existed  in  all  public  affairs  at  the  time  of  the 
late  king's  death,  and  steps  were  taken  in  this  direc- 
tion. The  first  years  of  Edward's  reign  wrere  taken 
up  therefore  in  arranging  and  regulating  the  hospitals, 
and  reducing  their  management  to  some  kind  of  order, 
and  also  to  the  adjustment  of  their  finances.  To  this 
end  committees  were  formed  of  aldermen  and  common 
councillors,  who  met  at  stated  times  and  discussed  the 
way  of  governing  the  charities  to  the  best  advantage. 
The  condition  of  the  sick  and  the  starving,  who  had 
been  deprived  of  both  their  shelter  and  their  food  by 
the  suppression  of  the  religious  establishments,  was 
deplorable  in  the  extreme.  They  wandered  through 
the  streets,  crying  out  in  their  agony  for  assistance,  or 
went  from  door  to  door,  seeking  help  and  protection. 
VOL.  I.— 20 


306  LONDON. 

The  alleys  and  lanes  were  infested  with  lepers,  old 
men  and  old  women,  and  persons  in  all  stages  of  con- 
sumption, cancer  and  other  terrible  afflictions.  The 
situation  became  finally  so  grave  that  in  1552  Sir 
Richard  Dobbes,  then  lord  mayor,  summoned  the  most 
prominent  citizens  to  assemble  in  their  respective 
parish  churches,  where  he  directed  that  they  should 
be  addressed  by  "  aldermen  and  other  grave  persons," 
and  by  them  exhorted  to  aid  the  civic  officials  with 
all  the  means  in  their  power  in  providing  for  the  poor 
and  the  suffering,  and  in  reorganizing  the  most  im- 
portant charities.  The  appeal  was  successful,  and  its 
result  eminently  satisfactory.  New  life  was  almost 
immediately  imparted  to  the  revived  hospital  of  St. 
Bartholomew,  which  Henry  VIII.  had  founded ;  the 
former  house  of  the  Grey  friars  at  Newgate  fitted  up 
as  a  school  for  the  children  of  the  indigent ;  and  the 
Hospital  of  St.  Thomas  of  Aeon,  which  had  been 
moved  to  Southwark,  purchased  from  the  crown,  and 
under  the  name  of  the  Hospital  of  St.  Thomas  the 
Apostle  opened  for  the  reception  of  the  poor,  the 
impotent,  the  lame  and  the  blind. 

The  young  king  was  appealed  to  in  person,  the  fol- 
lowing year,  in  behalf  of  the  great  work.  Edward 
VI.  responded  willingly,  and  granted  the  royal  palace 
of  Bridewell  to  the  city  of  London,  to  be  used  as  a 
workhouse  and  a  house  of  correction,  the  endowments 
granted  by  Henry  VIII.  to  the  Savoy  being  trans- 
ferred to  it.  Finally,  on  June  26, 1553,  Edward  VI. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  307 

signed  the  letters-patent  whereby  the  whole  modern 
system  of  municipal  charities  was  inaugurated.  With 
the  exception  of  Bridewell,  all  these  foundations  still 
exist,  and  Bridewell  has  left  its  legacy  in  the  name 
which  is  now  used  throughout  the  country  for  a  tem- 
porary prison.  While  the  palace  thus  generously 
bestowed  on  the  city  by  Edward  VI.  owed  its  erec- 
tion to  his  predecessor,  yet  there  had  been  another 
and  older  palace  on  the  same  site  before  it.  Though 
the  site  itself  could  scarcely  have  been  dry,  and  suit- 
able for  purposes  of  habitation  prior  to  the  beginning 
of  the  thirteenth  century,  yet  Henry  III.  seems  to 
have  resided  here  on  various  occasions,  if  not  John. 
Comparatively  few  details  of  its  early  history  have, 
however,  descended  to  us;  but,  like  the  neighboring 
Savoy,  it  was  probably  foreshore  before  it  became 
royal  property.  A  new  palace  was  erected  by  Henry 
VIII.,  to  accommodate  Charles  V.  on  the  occasion 
of  his  visit  to  England,  but  he  did  not  occupy  it.  He 
was  instead  lodged  at  the  Dominican  priory,  com- 
monly called  Blackfriars,  a  part  of  his  suite,  however, 
being  lodged  at  Bridewell,  and  a  temporary  bridge 
and  covered  passage  built  between  the  two.  For  the 
remainder  of  his  retinue  accommodation  was  secured 
at  that  famous  inn,  the  St.  Lawrence,  otherwise  called 
Bosom's  Inn,  in  St.  Lawrence  Lane,  Cheapside. 
Henry  VIII. ,  however,  seemed  to  fancy  the  site,  and 
here  it  was  that  he  and  the  unfortunate  Katherine  of 
Arragon  resided,  while  the  legatine  court  sat  on  the 


308  LONDON. 

divorce  question  at  Blackfriars,  across  the  Fleet. 
Though  passing  from  royal  proprietorship,  as  we 
have  seen,  under  Edward  VI.,  it  did  not  permanently 
remain  a  workhouse,  as  was  intended.  It  was  used 
by  the  civic  authorities  for  various  purposes,  and 
though  in  a  great  part  destroyed  during  the  great  fire 
in  1666,  some  of  it  remained  and  was  only  finally 
pulled  down  in  1863. 

If  Bridewell  disappeared,  yet  there  is  one  great 
institution  with  which  the  name  of  Edward  VI.  is 
indelibly  associated,  and  the  more  appropriately,  since, 
by  his  munificence  in  this  instance,  he,  the  boy  king, 
was  providing  for  the  education  and  maintenance  of 
less  fortunate  youths.  As  has  already  been  seen,  a 
school  had  been  founded  in  the  former  house  of  the 
Franciscans  at  Newgate  for  the  benefit  of  fatherless 
boys  and  others  in  difficult  circumstances.  This 
institution  was  given  the  name  of  Christ's  Hospital, 
though  commonly  called  the  "Blue  Coat  School," 
from  the  costume  worn  by  the  boys,  which  consisted 
of  a  dark-blue  coat  or  gown,  a  red  leather  belt,  bright 
yellow  stockings,  and  a  clergyman's  band  around  the 
neck.  With  this  attire,  already  sufficiently  grotesque, 
a  yellow  petticoat  was  formerly  worn,  but  the  use  of 
this  singular  piece  of  male  attire  has  been  recently 
discontinued.  The  flat  cap  of  black  woollen  yarn, 
about  the  size  of  a  saucer,  and  which  comprised  the 
accompanying  headgear,  was  also  dropped  some  years 
ago. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOES.  309 

This  famous  institution  is  one  of  the  most  interest- 
ing in  London.  The  buildings  suffered  greatly  in 
the  great  fire  of  1666,  and  became  almost  hopelessly 
dilapidated,  when  Sir  John  Frederick  in  1680  under- 
took the  benevolent  task  of  rebuilding  them  at  his 
own  expense.  Another  great  benefactor  of  the  insti- 
tution was  Sir  Robert  Clayton,  and  the  record  of  his 
benevolence  is  to  be  seen  in  the  inscription  below  the 
statue  of  Edward  VI.,  at  the  entrance  gate.  In  1803 
the  buildings  were  most  extensively  repaired  and 
renovated,  large  contributions  being  forthcoming  from 
the  corporation  and  the  livery  companies.  It  was 
twenty  years,  however,  before  work  was  commenced, 
and  it  was  only  on  April  28,  1825,  that  the  Duke  of 
York  laid  the  corner-stone  of  the  new  hall,  which  was 
erected  from  designs  of  John  Shaw,  the  architect  of 
the  infirmary,  which  had  been  put  up  some  years  be- 
fore, and  the  new  hall  was  formally  opened  on  May 
29,  1829.  It  is  one  hundred  and  eighty-seven  feet 
long,  fifty-one  feet  wide,  and  forty-seven  high,  being 
thus  thirty-four  feet  longer  than  Guildhall  and  fifty- 
one  feet  shorter  than  Westminster  Hall.  The  building 
is  perpendicular  in  style.  A  large  playground,  on 
the  site  of  the  old  Giltspur  Street  Compter,  was  added 
in  1868-'69.  The  hall  well  merits  a  visit.  At  its 
upper  end  is  a  large  picture  of  Edward  VI.,  granting 
the  charter  of  incorporation  to  the  hospital.  There 
is  also  a  large  picture  of  James  IT.,  seated  on  his 
throne,  surrounded  by  courtiers,  receiving  some  of  the 


310  LONDON. 

mathematical  pupils  on  the  occasion  of  their  honor 
day.  This  custom  is  still  kept  up,  and  annually  said 
pupils  are  presented  to  the  sovereign.  Another  picture 
represents  Charles  II.  There  are,  besides,  full-length 
portraits  of  Queen  Victoria  and  the  prince  consort. 
The  mathematical  school  was  founded  by  Charles  II. 
in  1672.  A  new  mathematical  and  grammar  school, 
with  drawing  school  above  and  dormitories,  was 
erected  in  1832,  and  a  large  entrance  in  Newgate 
Street  was  opened.  The  two  principal  classes  in  the 
school  are  called  "Grecians"  and  "Deputy  Gre- 
cians." The  forms  below  are  called  the  "  Great  Eras- 
mus "  and  the  "  Little  Erasmus."  It  is  in  the  great 
hall  that  the  annual  exercises  are  held.  These  for- 
merly took  place  on  St.  Matthew's  day,  but  now  occur  on 
the  July  breaking  up.  On  these  occasions  the  so-called 
"Grecians,"  or  head  boys,  deliver  a  number  of  orations 
before  the  lord  mayor,  the  corporation  of  the  city,  the 
board  of  governors,  and  assembled  guests,  who  as  a 
rule  include  a  large  number  of  distinguished  }>ersonages. 
It  was  not  only  the  organization  of  charities  which 
was  made  the  object  of  a  special  effort,  but  also  cer- 
tain very  essential  civic  reforms.  Thus,  the  escape  of 
criminals  from  the  city  over  London  Bridge  to  South- 
wark  had  become  a  notorious  outrage.  The  independ- 
ence of  that  borough  had  long  been  a  cause  of  great 
annoyance  to  the  civic  authorities,  and  they  finally 
obtained  from  Edward  VI.  concessions  whereby  they 
could  prevent  and  control  this  escape  of  malefactors. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOKS.  3H 

It  was  not,  however,  until  1550  that  the  authorities 
of  the  city  obtained  a  complete  control  over  South- 
wark.  A  royal  charter,  dated  April  23,  in  that  year 
granted  to  the  "commonalty"  of  London  the  "manor" 
of  Southwark  and  all  the  manorial  rights  thereunto 
annexed,  with  both  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction. 
On  receiving  the  charter  the  court  of  aldermen  elected 
one  more  to  their  own  number,  and  thus  was  South- 
wark, which  had  in  Roman  days  been  second  prob- 
ably not  even  to  London  in  importance,  brought  into 
the  boundaries  of  the  city,  and  transformed  into  a 
ward,  to  which  was  given  the  name  of  Bridge  Ward 
Without.  That  Southwark  was  in  Roman  and  Anglo- 
Saxon  days  a  place  of  considerable  importance  is 
proved  by  the  remains  which  have  been  disinterred  in 
recent  excavations,  and  the  limits  of  the  then  fortified 
enclosure  are  determinable,  as  in  the  city  itself,  by  the 
situation  of  the  places  of  interment,  which  were  al- 
ways just  beyond  the  line  of  the  fortifications.  It 
does  not  appear  by  name  or  otherwise  in  any  Saxon 
charter,  but  its  name  shows  that  the  walls  existed  in 
Saxon  times,  and  they  were  probably  highly  useful  in 
protecting  the  bridge  during  the  war  of  the  Danish 
invasion.  These  walls  were  in  all  probability  de- 
stroyed during  the  conquest,  and  Southwark  remained 
therefore  a  very  inconsiderable  place  for  many  cen- 
turies, though  it  sent  members  to  Parliament  as  early 
as  1265,  and  is  in  fact  mentioned  as  having  two  mem- 
bers in  1298  and  1300  and  later  years. 


312  LONDON. 

The  death  of  Edward  VI.  occurred,  as  we  have  seen, 
at  Greenwich  on  July  6,  1553;  but,  though  Henry 
VIII.  had  endeavored  to  secure  the  peaceful  succes- 
sion to  the  throne  by  causing  to  be  repealed  the  act 
of  Parliament  whereby  the  illegitimacy  of  his  two 
daughters,  the  Princesses  Mary  and  Elizabeth,  was 
affirmed,  and  by  causing  a  new  act  to  be  passed 
whereby  their  legitimacy  was  established,  yet  Mary 
did  not  obtain  her  rights  without  a  struggle,  and,  as 
usual,  London  was  the  theatre  of  the  principal  opera- 
tions. The  consequences  which  followed  the  attempt 
made  by  John  Dudley,  Earl  of  Warwick  and  Duke 
of  Northumberland,  who  had  succeeded  to  the  aims 
and  ambitions  of  the  Protector  Somerset,  to  place  his 
daughter-in-law,  Lady  Jane  Dudley,  usually  spoken 
of  by  her  maiden  name  as  Lady  Jane  Grey,  on  the 
throne,  threw  the  wrhole  city  into  great  confusion. 
The  unfortunate  girl  had  not  a  shadow  of  claim  to 
the  crown,  though  the  pretensions  advanced  for  her 
were  based  on  the  fact  that  her  mother  Frances, 
Marchioness  of  Dorset,  was  the  daughter  of  Charles 
Brandon,  Duke  of  Suffolk,  and  of  the  Princess  Mary, 
second  daughter  of  Henry  VII.  The  whole  con- 
spiracy was  intended  merely  to  further  the  ambitions 
of  her  father-in-law,  who  had,  only  two  months  before 
Edward's  death,  secured  her  marriage  to  his  fourth 
son,  Gtiilford  Dudley.  The  wedding  had  taken  place 
at  Durham  House,  the  London  residence  of  the  Dud- 
leys, and  had  been  made  an  occasion  of  much  pomp 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.      313 

and  circumstance.  These  daring  intrigues,  which  re- 
sulted so  disastrously  for  all  concerned,  gave  to  that 
grim  fortress,  the  Tower  of  London,  the  most  tragic 
page  in  its  history. 

The  events  by  which  Lady  Jane  Dudley  was 
dragged  from  the  comparative  tranquillity  and  seclu- 
sion of  private  life  into  the  brilliant  glare  of  public 
and  political  life,  her  proclamation  as  queen  with  all 
the  pomp  and  solemnity  of  such  occasions,  and  the 
subsequent  developments  of  the  conspiracy,  are  too 
well  known  to  require  any  lengthy  recital  here. 
Mary  made  her  solemn  entry  into  London  on  August 
3,  1553,  and  was  received  with  joy  and  acclamations 
by  all  classes  of  the  people.  The  Duke  of  North- 
umberland was  arrested  and  committed  to  the  Tower, 
as  were  also  the  Duke  of  Suffolk,  Lord  Guilford 
Dudley,  and  his  unfortunate  wife,  the  victim  of  the 
whole  affair.  They  were  tried  for  high  treason,  and 
condemned  to  the  scaffold.  The  Duke  of  Northum- 
berland was  executed  on  August  22  of  the  same  year. 
The  Duke  of  Suffolk  was  pardoned,  but  his  implica- 
tion in  the  Wyatt  Rebellion,  organized  as  a  protest 
against  the  queen's  marriage  with  Philip  of  Spain, 
proved  fatal,  and  he  was  executed  on  Tower  Hill  on 
February  23,  1554;  the  Lady  Jane  Grey  and  her 
husband,  Lord  Guilford  Dudley,  having  met  a  similar 
fate  on  the  February  12  preceding.  The  spot  where 
the  tragedy  was  enacted  is  still  reverently  shown  to 
visitors  at  the  Tower. 


314  LONDON. 

Meanwhile  the  queen  had  worked  earnestly  to  re- 
store the  religious  status  of  the  nation,  and  incurred 
the  opprobrious  appellation  of  "  Bloody  Mary  "  from 
the  zeal  with  which  she  endeavored  to  extirpate 
schism  and  heresy.  It  was  but  natural,  however,  that 
such  men  as  Craumer,  Holgate,  Coverdale,  Ridley 
and  Hooper,  whom  she  conceived  to  have  been  false 
to  every  trust,  both  in  Church  and  in  State,  should  be 
brought  before  the  bar  of  justice  and  punished  accord- 
ing to  their  deserts.  But  her  greatest  imprudence  and 
mistake  was  her  marriage  with  Philip  II.  of  Spain. 
This  union  was  in  every  way  most  ill  advised.  The 
king  of  Spain  landed  at  Southampton  on  July  20, 
1554,  and  his  marriage  to  the  queen  was  celebrated 
with  due  pomp  and  solemnity  a  few  days  later  at 
Winchester.  On  November  20  following  Cardinal 
Pole  arrived  in  England  as  legate,  and  was  immedi- 
ately received  with  great  honor,  the  king  and  queen 
advancing  to  meet  him  with  much  ceremony.  Lon- 
don was  now  the  scene  of  a  very  grand  proceeding. 
Parliament  was  assembled,  and  the  Pope's  legate  in- 
vited the  Lords  and  the  Commons  to  reconcile  them- 
selves with  the  Holy  See,  from  which  error  had  so 
long  estranged  them.  His  message  was  received  with 
much  satisfaction,  and  both  houses  voted  an  address 
expressive  of  their  sorrow  at  what  had  occurred  in 
the  past,  with  prayer  for  pardon,  and  promise  of 
future  loyalty.  The  Pope's  legate,  himself  an  Eng- 
lish prince  nearly  allied  to  the  royal  family,  then  pro- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOKS.      315 

nounced  a  solemn  absolution,  whereby  the  Parliament 
and  the  kingdom  were  freed  from  all  ecclesiastical  cen- 
sure, and  were  received  back  into  the  bosom  of  the 
Church.  The  old  ceremonies  and  processions  were 
now  fully  re-established,  and  the  mayor  and  aldermen, 
in  their  robes  of  office,  formed  again  one  of  the  prin- 
cipal features  of  the  procession  about  St.  Paul's.  Te 
Deums  were  sung  in  all  the  churches,  and  bonfires 
were  lighted  at  night  throughout  the  city. 

But  all  this  did  not  have  the  effect  which  was  de- 
sired and  expected.  There  were  those,  however,  who 
strongly  opposed  the  doctrine  of  Papal  Supremacy, 
and  were  entirely  in  sympathy  with  the  new  state 
of  things,  so  that  the  queen  and  the  parliament,  who 
conceived  it  their  sacred  duty  to  inaugurate  measures 
of  repression  and  discipline,  came  naturally  into  much 
disfavor.  The  queen  had  long  been  in  a  very  suffer- 
ing state  of  health,  and  the  problems  and  difficulties 
of  her  position  greatly  increased  her  distress.  Ap- 
prehensive for  the  future  of  the  Church  in  England, 
distressed  by  the  absence  of  her  husband,  who,  find- 
ing his  authority  very  limited  in  England,  preferred  a 
residence  on  the  continent,  dismayed  by  her  own  bar- 
renness, and  dejected  by  the  loss  of  Calais  and  the 
reverses  of  English  armies  in  France,  the  unfortunate 
princess  succumbed  to  a  lingering  illness,  and  died  at 
St.  James'  Palace — where  she  had  taken  up  her  resi- 
dence, preferring  it  to  Whitehall,  which  was  too 
much  associated  with  Anne  Boleyn  and  her  mother's 


316  LONDON. 

sufferings — on  November  17,  1558.  The  same  day 
Cardinal  Pole  died  at  Lambeth  Palace,  whither  he 
had  taken  tip  his  residence  on  succeeding  Cranmer 
as  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

The  news  of  Mary's  death  reached  Elizabeth  at 
Hatfield,  and  as  soon  as  she  could  possibly  convene  a 
suitable  court  and  retinue  she  proceeded  to  London, 
into  which  city  she  made  a  solemn  entry  on  November 
24  following.  The  route  of  the  royal  procession  was 
brilliantly  decorated,  and  lined  by  thousands  of  spec- 
tators. The  queen  was  met  at  Highgate  by  the  lord 
mayor,  the  aldermen  and  other  civic  officials,  and 
conducted  to  the  Charter  House,  where  she  appears  to 
have  remained  until  her  coronation.  This  ceremony 
was  for  a  time  delayed,  owing  to  the  difficulty  which 
she  experienced  in  finding  a  bishop  who  was  willing 
to  consecrate  and  crown  her.  But  Elizabeth  was 
not  to  be  easily  discouraged,  and  she  finally  suc- 
ceeded in  her  quest,  for  Oglethorpe,  Bishop  of  Carlisle, 
was  at  last  induced  to  officiate  on  the  occasion. 

The  procession  from  the  Tower  was  of  exceptional 
splendor,  and  took  place,  as  now  had  become  the  cus- 
tom, on  the  day  previous  to  the  coronation — that  is,  on 
January  13,  1559.  The  queen  left  the  Tower,  where 
she  had  spent  the  preceding  night,  according  to  ancient 
usage,  at  two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon.  The  streets 
were  splendidly  decorated,  and  the  queen  was  at- 
tended by  a  brilliant  retinue,  or,  to  use  the  ancient 
language,  "  honorably  accompanied  "  by  the  "  nobility 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  317 

of  the  realm,"  the  barons  and  other  gentlemen,  and 
with  a  notable  "trayne  of  goodlye  and  beautifull 
ladies  all  richlye  appointed."  The  whole  pageant 
was,  in  fact,  organized  on  a  scale  of  exceeding  mag- 
nificence, and  the  pompous  habits  of  the  age,  in  which 
the  citizens  of  London  vied  with  each  other  in  the 
most  costly  shows,  were  illustrated  to  their  fullest  ex- 
tent on  this  occasion.  Indeed  it  would  seem  as  if  the 
great  civic  pageants  here  attained  their  culminating 
point,  and  as  if  from  this  occasion  they  began  to  sub- 
side— at  least  in  most  of  their  old-fashioned  and  quaint 
peculiarities — until  their  existence  itself  faded  gradu- 
ally away.  On  this  occasion,  however,  the  procession 
was  compelled  to  halt  that  the  queen  might  admire 
particular  displays  erected  by  the  city  or  the  livery 
companies.  Thus,  on  the  corner,  at  Fenchurch,  a 
scaffolding  richly  decorated  had  been  put  up,  whereon 
stood  a  band.  Here  the  queen's  chariot  was  stopped, 
in  order  that  a  small  boy,  in  costly  apparel,  might  wel- 
come her  in  the  name  of  the  city.  AVhen  the  cere- 
mony was  concluded  the  queen  proceeded  on  her  way 
until  the  upper  end  of  Gracious  Street  had  been 
reached.  There,  before  the  sign  of  "  The  Eagle,"  the 
city  had  caused  to  be  built  a  splendid  arch.  A  stage 
had  also  been  erected,  which  extended  from  one  side 
of  the  street  to  the  other.  It  was  lavishly  orna- 
mented with  battlements,  and  contained  three  arch- 
ways, over  the  middle  one  of  which  there  were  three 
projecting  stages,  or  elevated  platforms.  On  these 


318  LONDON. 

were  figures  of  Henry  VII.  and  Elizabeth,  his  wife, 
seated  on  thrones  and  clad  in  robes  of  state — the 
former,  being  heir  of  the  house  of  Lancaster,  issuing, 
as  it  were,  from  a  red  rose,  while  the  latter,  being 
the  heiress  of  the  house  of  York,  issuing,  as  it  were, 
from  a  white  rose.  Two  branches,  which  were  ar- 
ranged so  as  to  start  from  these  roses,  met  at  the 
second  staging,  and  these  were  entwined  so  as  to  make 
a  seat  for  a  life-size  figure  of  Henry  VIII.,  also 
splendidly  apparelled.  By  his  side  was  a  figure  of 
Anne  Boleyn,  also  in  royal  attire ;  and  again  from 
these  seats  started  two  branches,  which,  uniting, 
formed  a  seat  for  a  large  figure  of  the  queen  herself, 
sumptuously  arrayed,  crowned  and  sceptred. 

Elizabeth,  it  is  related,  stopped  and  viewed  this 
strange  exhibit.  Here  again  she  had  to  submit 
patiently  to  an  address  in  verse,  delivered  by  a  small 
child,  after  listening  to  which,  and  thanking  the  city 
for  their  courtesy,  the  royal  procession  moved  on  to 
Cornhill.  Here  arches  had  been  erected,  and  other 
exhibits  had  been  contrived,  and  included  allegorical 
figures  of  Religion,  Love,  Wisdom,  Justice  and  other 
virtues,  which  it  was  thus  delicately  insinuated  were 
possessed  by  Elizabeth  herself.  Another  child  here 
delivered  another  oration,  and  the  procession  con- 
tinued. At  the  conduit  of  the  Cheap,  on  the  corner 
of  Soapers'  Lane,  an  exhibit  consisting  of  figures  of 
the  eight  beatitudes  was  viewed  by  the  queen.  At 
Little  Conduit  Street  a  colossal  figure  of  Time  domi- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  319 

nated  the  scene.  At  St.  Peter's  on  the  Cheap  another 
child,  gorgeously  dressed  up,  solemnly  presented  her 
with  a  Bible.  Everywhere,  and  from  every  window, 
depended  rich  and  costly  banners,  with  streamers, 
and  at  the  end  of  the  Cheap,  Ranulph  Cholmeley,  the 
city  recorder,  presented  the  queen  with  a  fine  red 
satin  purse,  embroidered  with  gold,  and  containing 
one  thousand  marks  in  gold. 

At  St.  Paul's  churchyard  Elizabeth  was  obliged  to 
submit  to  another  oration,  this  time  very  lengthy  and 
in  Latin,  delivered  by  a  pupil  of  St.  Paul's  School 
selected  by  the  head  master  thereof.  The  fifth  and 
last  pageant  had  been  erected  at  "the  Conduit,"  in 
Fleet  Street.  It  consisted  of  a  species  of  platform,  in 
the  shape  of  a  castle,  with  four  towers,  upon  which 
was  erected  a  throne,  behind  which  had  been  placed  a 
tree.  The  figure  of  a  woman  was  seated  enthroned 
on  this  chair,  crowned  and  sceptred,  and  over  the 
figure  was  the  inscription,  "  Deborah,  the  judge  and 
restorer  of  the  house  of  Israel " — this  another  deli- 
cate allusion  to  Elizabeth.  On  other  steps  of  the 
platform  were  figures,  also  richly  apparelled,  repre- 
senting the  nobility,  the  clergy  and  the  commonalty. 
Another  child  here  delivered  a  "tremendous"  ora- 
tion. This  calamity  accomplished,  the  procession 
proceeded  slowly  towards  Westminster,  where,  on  the 
day  following,  the  coronation  took  place.  The  latter 
ceremony  was  conducted  with  hitherto  unexampled 
splendor,  and  was  more  brilliant  in  its  details  and 


320  LONDON. 

elaboration  than  any  preceding  occasion  of  a  similar 
kind. 

Elizabeth  had  found  her  strongest  support  in  the 
city,  and  she  was  very  careful  therefore  to  appease 
any  fears  as  to  her  right  policy  which  might  have 
arisen  in  the  bosom  of  the  citizens.  With  a  magna- 
nimity truly  laudable,  or  a  prudence  really  extra- 
ordinary, she  buried  in  oblivion  all  offences,  and 
received  with  graciousness  even  those  who  had  at 
first  taken  the  most  decided  stand  against  her.  She 
was  also  very  careful  not  to  alarm  the  Catholic  party, 
and  though  exhibiting  from  the  first  a  very  decided 
preference  for  the  Protestant  faction,  yet  she  retained 
a  number  of  her  sister's  councillors,  but  added  some, 
who  were  well  known  to  be  strongly  partisan,  of  the  so- 
called  reform  movement.  Thus  Sir  Nicholas  Brown 
was  created  lord  keeper,  and  Sir  William  Cecil  secre- 
tary of  state.  So  skillful  and  daring  was  Elizabeth 
in  her  political  craft  that,  notwithstanding  several 
outbreaks  of  the  old  Tudor  temper  and  violence,  she 
succeeded  marvellously  in  retaining  her  popularity, 
even  among  contending  factions.  The  city  stood  by 
her,  and  never  forgot  that  her  father  had  once  held 
office  as  a  mayor.  There  was,  however,  a  strong 
opposition  party  among  the  Catholics,  led  by  Sir 
Thomas  White,  the  eminent  founder  of  St.  John's 
College,  who  had  held  the  mayoralty  at  the  time  of 
the  execution  of  Lady  Jane  Dudley ;  but  the  rigorous 
enforcement  of  the  laws  against  heresy  during  the 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.      321 

previous  reign  had  turned  the  tide  of  public  opinion, 
always  fickle  and  changeable,  towards  the  anti-Cath- 
olic side,  Later  on,  the  excessive  zeal  of  the  Puri- 
tans, under  Charles  I.,  had  the  reverse  effect,  and 
popular  feeling  was  turned  distinctly  in  the  opposite 
direction.  London  was  always  the  scene  of  these  ex- 
citements, and  from  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  to  the 
death  of  Cromwell  the  city  was  the  theatre  of  a  relig- 
ious as  well  as  a  civic  drama,  and  it  may  truly  be 
said  that  the  religious  feeling  prevailed  over  and  ran 
higher  than  any  political  or  civic  sentiment. 

Under  Elizabeth  a  new  direction  and  impulse  was 
given  to  English  commerce,  because  of  the  great  ex- 
tension in  England's  naval  power.  The  formation  of 
new  livery  companies  still  continued.  The  Girdlers 
obtained  from  her  in  1568  a  confirmation  of  their 
charter.  The  same  year  she  granted  a  charter  to  the 
Bricklayers;  in  1571  one  to  the  Joiners,  and  in  1580 
the  Painter-Stainers  obtained  from  her  the  grant  of  a 
charter,  while  the  same  year  she  accorded  to  one 
James  Verselyn,  a  Venetian,  who  had  opened  a  glass- 
house near  Blackfriars  for  making  Venetian  glass,  a 
privilege  under  her  great  seal.  Trade  with  Flanders 
had,  it  is  true,  flagged,  after  the  Duke  of  Alva's  sub- 
jection of  the  Low  Countries,  but  it  soon  sought 
other  directions  and  fields  of  energy.  The  merchants 
and  large  exporters  and  importers  formed  companies, 
after  the  manner  of  the  craftsmen's  guilds,  and  ob- 
tained royal  charters  for  the  same.  It  is  true  that  a 
VOL.  I.- 21 


322  LONDON. 

"so-called  company  of  merchant  adventurers"  had 
obtained  a  charter  from  Henry  VII.,  but  it  was  from 
Elizabeth  that  the  Turkey  Company  in  1579  and  the 
East  India  Company  in  1600  obtained  their  charters. 
The  opening  of  the  Royal  Exchange,  which  had 
been  organized  after  the  pattern  of  the  Antwerp 
Bourse,  on  January  23,  1570,  gave  a  new  departure 
to  commercial  affairs,  and  while  some  of  the  ancient 
traditions  of  the  old  guild  merchant  were  uncon- 
sciously and  accidentally  revived  by  it,  it  in  fact 
created  a  whole  new  system  of  business  relations. 
The  Exchange  was  installed  in  a  building  erected  for 
the  purpose  by  Sir  Thomas  Gresham  on  the  same  site 
as  that  occupied  by  the  present  building.  Gresham 
had  previously  opened  a  bank  at  the  sign  of  "  the 
Grasshopper,"  in  Lombard  Street,  and  was  thus  one 
of  the  first  of  "the  Goldsmiths"  to  become  a  banker. 
The  opening  of  the  Exchange,  which  was  performed 
by  Queen  Elizabeth  in  person,  was  made  the  occasion 
of  great  display.  The  queen,  who  was  at  the  time 
residing  at  Somerset  House,  in  the  Strand,  entered  the 
city  by  Temple  Bar,  passing  through  Fleet  Street 
and  the  Cheap,  and  so  on  by  the  north  side  of  the 
Exchange  through  Threadneedle  Street  to  the  house 
of  Sir  Thomas  Gresham,  in  Bishopsgate  Street,  where 
she  honored  him  by  her  presence  at  dinner.  After 
dinner  the  party  proceeded  with  much  state  to  the  Ex- 
change, which  was  then  formally  declared  open,  a  her- 
ald with  trumpet  proclaiming  it  the  Royal  Exchange. 


Temple  Bar,  Removed  J878 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  323 

The  architect  was  the  Flemish  Henryke,  and  the 
materials  themselves  which  had  been  used  in  the  con- 
struction had  been  brought  from  Flanders.  In  gen- 
eral design  the  building  was  not  unlike  that  one  from 
which  it  had  been  copied  in  more  ways  than  one,  the 
Bourse  at  Antwerp,  a  quadrangle,  with  a  cloister  run- 
ning round  the  interior,  and  a  "pauu"  or  pathwalk 
above,  with  other  chambers  near  to  the  roof.  On  the 
Cornhill  side  there  stood  the  bell-tower,  and  on  the 
north  a  tall  Corinthian  column,  each  of  which  was 
surmounted  by  a  huge  stone  grasshopper,  the  crest  of 
the  Greshams.  Niches  in  the  quadrangle,  immedi- 
ately over  the  covered  walk,  contained  statues  of 
English  kings  and  queens,  from  Edward  the  Confessor 
to  Elizabeth  herself.  The  whole  structure  was  de- 
stroyed by  the  great  fire  in  1666,  and  another  build- 
ing, almost  identical  in  style,  was  erected  on  the  site. 
This  second  edifice  wras  designed  by  Edward  Jarman, 
the  city  surveyor.  This  one  was  also  destroyed  by 
fire,  on  January  10,  1838,  and  the  present  building 
erected.  On  each  occasion  the  only  statue  to  escape 
uninjured  was  that  of  the  founder  himself,  and  while 
kings  and  queens  lay  shattered  off  their  pedestals, 
Gre.sham,  from  his,  viewed  the  scene  of  disaster  with 
what  may  truly  be  said  to  be  a  stony,  but  complacent 
stare. 

About  coeval  with  the  foundation  of  the  Royal 
Exchange  another  no  less  interesting  initiative  was 
takeu  this  being  the  setting  aside  for  the  "  college " 


324  LONDON. 

or  "  common  house  "  for  the  doctors  of  the  civil  law, 
and  the  study  and  practice  of  the  same,  of  a  large 
mansion  on  St.  Beuet's  Hill,  to  the  south  of  St. 
Paul's  churchyard,  having  frontings  on  Knightrider 
Street.  The  property  had  been  leased  in  reversion 
by  the  dean  and  chapter  of  St.  Paul's  to  one  John 
Incent,  a  "gentleman  proctor  of  the  archers  and 
chapter  clerk  of  the  tenements  of  St.  Erkenwald," 
and  was  purchased  in  the  beginning  of  Queen  Eliza- 
beth's reign  for  the  purpose  before  described  by  one 
"  Master  Henry  Harvey,"  doctor  of  civil  and  of 
canon  law,  master  of  Trinity  Hall,  Cambridge,  and 
prebendary  and  dean  of  the  archers.  Before  this 
time  the  civilians  and  canonists  had  been  lodged 
most  meanly  in  Paternoster  Row,  which  lodging,  after 
their  removal  to  their  new  quarters,  became  the 
tavern  of  the  Queen's  Head.  The  house,  which 
came  soon  to  be  known  as  "  Doctors'  Commons,"  was 
destroyed  in  the  great  fire  of  1666,  but  soon  re-erected. 
It  was  a  building  of  red  brick,  with  stone  coigns  and 
dressings,  having  its  principal  front  on  Knightrider 
Street,  and  was  built  around  two  quadrangles.  It 
contained,  besides  the  large  hall  for  the  hearing  of 
cases,  a  dining  hall,  library,  other  public  apartments 
and  doctors'  chambers.  Doctors'  Commons  comprised 
five  courts,  of  which  three  appertained  to  the  arch- 
diocese of  Canterbury,  one  to  the  diocese  of  London, 
and  one  to  the  lord  commissioners  of  the  Admiralty. 
First  came  the  Court  of  Arches,  which  was  that  of 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  325 

the  archbishop ;  secondly,  the  Prerogative  Court, 
where  wills  and  testaments  were  proved  and  letters 
of  administration  taken  out;  thirdly,  the  Court  of 
Faculties  and  Dispensations ;  fourthly,  the  Consistory 
Court  of  the  Bishop  of  London  ;  and,  fifthly,  the  High 
Court  of  Admiralty.  The  recent  readjustment  and 
alteration  made  in  the  Courts  of  Law,  and  the  removal 
of  all  the  courts  to  the  New  Law  Court  Buildings,  led 
to  the  dissolution  of  Doctors'  Commons,  the  library 
and  portraits  being  sold  in  1862,  and  the  building 
itself  cleared  away  in  1867.  A  part  of  Queen  Victoria 
Street,  that  modern  thoroughfare,  now  passes  over 
what  was  formerly  the  peaceful  gardens  of  the  learned 
canonists. 

As  we  have  said,  the  day  of  Flanders'  commercial 
grandeur  and  prosperity  was  over.  Spanish  rule, 
never  very  happy  in  its  methods,  had  even  in  those 
days  proved  disastrous  to  trade,  and  had  a  very  un- 
fortunate effect  on  the  commercial  conditions  of  the 
Netherlands.  What  was  Flanders'  loss,  however,  was 
London's  gain.  The  markets  of  the  city  took  unto 
themselves  a  distinctly  cosmopolitan  character,  as  well 
for  the  great  divergence  in  the  nationalities  of  their 
frequenters  as  to  the  variety  of  their  exhibited  wares ; 
for  there  the  gold  and  sugar  of  the  New  World  were 
found,  side  by  side  with  the  silks  and  cottons  of 
India,  and  the  woollen  stuffs  having  England  as  their 
place  of  manufacture.  So  great  was  the  assistance 
which  the  vigorous  commercial  policy  of  Elizabeth 


326  LONDON. 

afforded,  that  a  statue  of  the  queen  was  erected  in  the 
Exchange  by  subscription  as  a  tribute  to  her  far- 
seeing  wisdom  and  sagacity.  It  was  not  only  in  her 
commercial  policy  that  Elizabeth  showed  herself  a 
shrewd  and  admirable  business  woman,  but  also  in 
the  punctual  payment  of  all  crown  debts,  the  abolition 
of  benevolences  and  all  illegal  exactions,  the  reform 
of  coinage,  and  the  correction  of  the  abuses  in  tax- 
ation. All  this  greatly  endeared  the  queen  to  the 
city,  and,  had  she  been  inclined  to  warlike  occupa- 
tions, she  would  have  found  prompt  response  in  all 
directions ;  men,  money,  ships,  all  would  have  been 
speedily  forthcoming. 

While  Elizabeth  was  thus  prosperous  and  happy 
a  great  tragedy,  in  which  she  and  her  country  were 
deeply  concerned,  was  unrolling  itself  in  the  life  of 
a  sister  queen.  The  story  of  Mary,  Queen  of  Scots, 
can  only  be  connected  with  our  subject  in  a  secondary 
manner,  yet,  while  having  no  direct  bearing  on  the 
history  of  London,  her  life  is  so  interwoven  with 
that  of  her  rival,  Elizabeth,  and  touches  at  so  many 
points  the  interests  of  the  city,  that  it  is  difficult  to 
omit  at  least  a  passing  mention  of  this  unfortunate 
princess.  The  marriage  of  Mary,  Queen  of  the  Scots, 
to  Henry  Darnley,  son  of  Matthew  Stuart,  Earl  of 
Lenox,  took  place  on  July  29,  1565.  The  marriage 
seemed  in  every  way  appropriate,  as  his  mother  was 
the  Lady  Margaret  Douglas,  daughter  of  Archibald 
Douglas,  Earl  of  Angus,  and  of  Mary  Tudor,  eldest 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOKS.  327 

sister  of  Henry  VIII.  He  was  thus,  after  Mary  her- 
self, the  next  heir  to  the  throne  of  England.  This  in 
itself,  however,  was  sufficient  enough  to  alarm  Eliza- 
beth. The  union  of  two,  who  were  in  the  eyes  of 
many  regarded  and  recognized  as  having  a  better 
right  to  the  throne  of  England  than  herself,  was 
enough,  indeed,  to  alarm  its  then  occupant,  for  their 
issue  would  indisputably  be  the  rightful  and  legitimate 
claimant  to  the  English  Crown.  Thus  did  Mary 
incur,  unwittingly,  the  everlasting  displeasure  of  her 
rival,  while  simultaneously  antagonizing  the  reform 
party  in  Scotland,  who  believed  the  family  of  Lenox 
inalienable  adherents  of  the  Catholic  church.  Inviting 
though  the  marriage  therefore  seemed,  it  was  to  be 
followed  by  developments  which  ultimately  and 
rapidly  led  to  the  ruin  of  the  unfortunate  Mary. 
The  discovery,  which  she  was  not  long  in  making,  in 
regard  to  the  defective  mental  qualities  of  her  hus- 
band, the  disappointment  occasioned  by  such  discovery, 
the  repugnance  consequent  upon  the  same,  the  advent 
of  the  accomplished  Rizzio,  the  suspicions  of  her 
husband,  the  assassination  of  the  unfortunate  Italian, 
the  gunpowder  catastrophe,  in  which  Darnley  lost  his 
life,  her  marriage  with  the  Earl  of  Bothwell  under 
such  extraordinarily  suspicious  circumstances,  all  fol- 
lowed each  other  in  rapid  succession  and  hastened 
Mary  to  her  doom. 

The  events  which  followed  are  equally  well  known, 
the  indignation  of  the  principal  nobility  for  her  weak- 


328  LONDON. 

ness,  if  not  actual  guilt,  the  meeting  of  the  two  armies 
at  Carberry  Hill,  some  six  miles  out  of  Edinburgh, 
and  the  subsequent  defeat  of  the  queen's  troops,  the 
imprisonment  of  Mary  at  Loch  Leven,  the  battle  of 
Langside,  in  which  the  queen's  troops  were  again  de- 
feated, the  flight  of  Bothwell  to  Denmark  and  that 
of  the  Queen  of  the  Scots  to  England,  to  seek  refuge 
in  the  hospitality  of  Elizabeth,  all  these  events 
scarcely  require  recapitulation.  AVith  Mary  on  her 
hands,  a  guest  and  yet  necessarily  a  prisoner,  seeking 
help  from  Elizabeth  as  a  sister  sovereign,  and  yet 
denying  the  latter's  right  to  have  her  tried  by  any 
tribunal,  be  it  ever  so  distinguished ;  to  which  situa- 
tion must  be  added  political  complications  in  France 
and  Scotland,  and  the  position  of  Elizabeth  will  be 
readily  admitted  to  have  been  one  of  extreme  diffi- 
culty. All  know  the  unfortunate  end  of  this  cele- 
brated affair.  The  Babington  conspiracy,  its  discovery 
by  Walsiugham,  the  trial  of  the  Queen  of  the  Scots  at 
Fotheringay,  and,  finally,  her  execution — all  these 
events  have  been  the  theme  of  a  vast  literature.  The 
discovery  of  the  Babington  conspiracy  and  the  con- 
demnation of  the  miserable  Mary  was  celebrated  in 
London  with  profusion  and  brilliancy.  Tapestries 
were  hung  out  of  every  window,  bells  were  rung 
throughout  the  city,  the  poor  were  feasted  at  a  splen- 
did banquet,  and  bonfires  were  lighted  at  every 
corner.  The  queen  wrote  a  letter  to  the  mayor  on  the 
occasion,  and,  when  the  news  came  of  the  final  tragedy 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  329 

at  Fotheringay  on  February  8, 1587 — the  execution  of 
Mary — though  Elizabeth  assumed  an  attitude  of  great 
horror  and  surprise,  yet  the  festivities  and  rejoicings 
were  repeated. 

Elizabeth  now  turned  her  attention  to  preparations 
for  the  repulse  of  the  expedition  which  Philip  II.  of 
Spain  was  dispatching  against  England.  These  mili- 
tary and  naval  preparations  were  watched  by  the 
citizens  of  Ix>ndon  with  great  interest.  The  queen 
had  asked  of  the  city  assistance  to  the  extent  of 
fifteen  ships  and  five  thousand  men.  The  city  fur- 
nished her  with  thirty  ships  and  ten  thousand  men, 
while  ten  thousand  more  were  formed  into  volunteer 
companies,  which  drilled  every  night  in  the  artillery 
grounds  at  Spital  Fields.  The  famous  review  at 
Tilbury  was  attended  by  all  London,  and,  when  the 
news  of  the  destruction  of  the  Spanish  Armada 
reached  the  city,  a  great  Te  Deum  of  thanksgiving  was 
held  at  St.  Paul's,  which  the  queen  attended  in 
solemn  state.  This  occurred  on  November  24,  1588. 
Seven  years  later,  also  in  November,  Fletcher,  who 
had  succeeded  Aylmer,  preached  his  sermon  on  Eliza- 
beth herself  and  her  virtues,  and  eight  years  later 
London  witnessed  the  mournful  but  pompous  and 
imposing  pageant  of  her  funeral  procession,  which 
accompanied  her  body  from  Richmond,  where  she 
died  on  March  24,  1603,  to  Westminster,  where  she 
was  interred. 

Such  were  the  personal  relations  of  Elizabeth  and 


330  LONDON. 

the  citizens  that  she  was  sincerely  mourned  by  the 
city,  more  sincerely  perhaps  than  any  sovereign  who 
had  ever  ruled  the  land  since  Edward  the  Confessor. 
Whatever  may  be  thought  of  Elizabeth  in  her  private 
character,  and  there  is  much  difference  of  opinion  on 
this  point,  high  tribute  must  in  justice  be  paid  to  her 
statesmanlike  qualities  and  her  undoubted  ability  in 
dealing  with  difficult  problems  and  intricate  political 
and  social  situations.  Not  only  England,  but  London 
itself,  had  much  for  which  to  be  grateful  to  her ;  for 
the  city  had  enjoyed  both  calm  and  good  government 
and  commercial  prosperity  during  her  reign,  disturbed 
perhaps  principally  by  the  fear  of  the  invasion  of  the 
Spanish  Armada  and  the  conspiracy  of  Essex.  That 
the  first  was  promptly  set  at  rest  by  the  destruction 
of  the  Spanish  fleet  we  have  already  seen.  In  the 
second  instance  the  riots  were  as  promptly  quelled  by 
the  strong  arm  of  Elizabeth,  the  earls  were  routed, 
and  Essex  and  a  number  of  his  associates  tried,  con- 
demned and  executed,  February  25,  1601.  The 
reign  of  Elizabeth  may  in  fact  be  said  to  have  been 
one  of  glory  and  prosperity,  and  the  foundation  of  the 
Royal  Exchange  to  have  been  an  epoch-making  event 
in  the  history  of  commercial  England.  It  is  a  some- 
what curious  fact,  however,  that  while  general  pros- 
perity so  greatly  increased  and  the  mayor  and  alder- 
men were  so  largely  engrossed  with  the  regulation  of 
public  charities — the  organization  of  which  had  been 
so  completely  disarranged  by  the  depredations  of 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  TUDORS.  331 

Henry  VIII. — yet  pauperism  seems,  on  the  other 
hand,  to  have  so  largely  increased.  That  this  should 
have  led  to  a  number  of  riots  and  brawls  is  not  sur- 
prising, and  the  very  year  1595,  which  witnessed  such 
great  rejoicings  in  honor  of  Elizabeth's  long  reign,  the 
riots,  in  which  the  apprentices  were  not  loth  to  join, 
had  attained  such  proportions  that  it  was  with  some 
difficulty,  and  only  by  measures  of  severe  repression, 
that  the  mayor  was  enabled  to  put  a  stop  to  the 
troubles,  and  the  matter  was  finally  brought  to  a  close 
by  the  trial  at  Guildhall  of  five  unhappy  wretches, 
who,  condemned  for  sedition,  were  executed  on  Tower 
Hill. 

Elizabeth  herself,  however,  took  the  most  active 
part  in  all  reforms,  and  also  greatly  interested  herself 
in  the  readjustment  of  public  charities  and  other  in- 
stitutions. It  was  a  part  of  her  general  policy  of 
benevolence.  It  was  not  only  hospitals  and  alms- 
houses  which  called  upon  her  attention,  but  she  had  a 
very  keen  appreciation  of  the  importance  of  education, 
and  as  early  in  her  reign  as  1560  she  had  granted 
her  patronage  to  the  foundation  of  a  large  grammar 
school  in  Southwark,  and  other  schools  were  later 
founded  by  her  munificence  and  under  her  patronage. 
Her  greatest  achievement,  however,  in  this  direction 
was  the  founding  in  1590  of  Westminster  School,  offi- 
cially known  as  St.  Peter's  College,  a  "  publicke 
school  for  grammar,  rethoricke,  poetrie,  and  for  the 
Latin  and  Greek  languages."  The  school  was  at- 


332  LONDON. 

tached  to  the  Collegiate  Church  of  St.  Peter  at  West- 
minster. There  had  been  a  school  connected  with  the 
abbey  as  early  as  the  fourteenth  century,  and  the  new 
school  was  founded,  as  it  were,  on  the  older  foundations 
which  had  suifered  annihilation  at  the  time  of  the  dis- 
solution. The  new  school  was  to  consist  of  a  dean, 
twelve  prebendaries,  twelve  almsmen  and  forty  schol- 
ars, with  a  master  and  an  usher;  but  a  far  greater 
number  of  masters  and  a  much  larger  number  of  boys 
are  now  connected  with  the  institution.  The  forty  of 
the  queen's  foundation  are  called  "  queen's  scholars," 
and  after  an  examination,  which  takes  place  on  the 
first  Tuesday  after  Rogation  Sunday,  four  are  elected 
to  Christ  Church,  Oxford,  and  four  to  Trinity  Col- 
lege, Cambridge.  To  be  placed  on  the  foundation,  boys 
must  be  over  twelve  and  under  thirteen  years  of  age. 
The  boys  "  on  the  foundation  "  were  formerly  sepa- 
rated from  the  "  town  boys  "  when  in  the  schoolroom 
by  a  bar  and  curtain,  but  this  is  no  longer  the  case. 
The  old  schoolroom  was,  in  fact,  the  former  monastic 
dormitory  of  the  days  when  the  abbey  was  a  monastic 
institution.  Other  buildings  have  been  erected,  how- 
ever, and  the  old  schoolroom  is  no  longer  used  for  the 
purpose.  The  college  hall,  originally  the  abbot's  re- 
fectory, had  been  erected  by  Littleton,  abbot  of  West- 
minster, in  the  reign  of  Edward  III.  The  queen's 
scholars,  however,  still  retain  some  of  their  ancient 
privileges ;  thus  it  is  still  their  privilege  to  have  seats 
provided  for  them  at  coronations  and  other  royal 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDOKS.  333 

functions  occurring  in  the  abbey  church,  and  this 
privilege  was  observed  as  recently  as  the  jubilee  cere- 
monies of  1887.  In  conformity  with  an  old  usage, 
the  queen's  scholars  give  a  theatrical  performance 
every  year  at  Christmas,  a  play  of  Terence  or  Plautus 
being  selected,  and  a  Latin  prologue  and  epilogue,  new 
on  each  occasion.  The  Westminster  boys  were  for 
many  years  held  to  outrage  all  decency  by  their  rough 
behavior,  but  their  manners  mended  greatly  with  the 
manners  of  the  age.  Among  other  eminent  men  who 
have  been  masters  of  this  school  have  been  Nicholas 
Udall,  the  author  of  "Roister  Doister;"  William  Cam- 
den,  the  antiquary,  and  the  renowned  Dr.  Richard 
Busby,  whose  name  has  been  given  to  a  certain  popular 
game ;  while  among  those  educated  here  who  have  risen 
to  prominence  have  been  Ben  Jonson,  George  Herbert, 
Giles  Fletcher,  Jasper  Mayne,  William  Cartwright, 
Abraham  Covvley,  John  Dryden,  Nathaniel  Lee,  Nicho- 
las Rowe,  Matthew  Prior,  William  Cowper  and  Rob- 
ert Southey ;  also  Sir  Harry  Vane,  the  younger,  Sir 
Christopher  Wren,  John  Locke,  Edward  Gibbon  and 
other  distinguished  men. 

One  year  after  the  foundation  of  Westminster 
School  by  Elizabeth,  that  great  company,  the  Mer- 
chant Tailors,  determined  also  to  assist  the  cause  of 
education,  and  the  consequence  of  this  decision  was 
the  foundation  of  Merchant  Tailors  School,  in  Suffolk 
Lane,  in  the  ward  of  Dowgate.  To  this  end,  it  was 
decided  to  purchase  the  west  gatehouse,  courtyard, 


334  LONDON. 

galleries  and  part  of  the  chapel,  forming  a  portion 
of  the  so-called  "  Manor  of  the  Rose/'  a  house  origi- 
nally built  by  Sir  John  Poultney,  knight,  who  had 
been  five  times  lord  mayor  in  the  reign  of  Edward 
III.  The  property  had  subsequently  and  for  many 
years  been  the  residence  of  the  De  la  Pole  family,  and 
had  since  then  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  Duke  of 
Buckingham.  Sir  Thomas  White,  who  had  then 
recently  founded  St.  John's  College,  Oxford,  and  who 
was  a  member  of  the  court  of  the  Merchant  Tailors 
Company,  and  one  Richard  Hills,  some  time  master 
of  the  company,  were  those  who  contributed  most 
largely  towards  the  purchase  of  the  building.  The 
premises  were  completely  destroyed  during  the  great 
fire  of  1666,  and  a  new  building — this  one  of  brick, 
with  pilasters,  with  a  head  master's  house  adjoining — 
was  erected  to  replace  the  old  school.  When,  how- 
ever, the  Charter  House  School  was  removed  to  Godal- 
ming,  the  Merchant  Tailors,  wishing  to  remove  their 
school  from  a  close  and  crowded  locality,  near  London 
Bridge,  in  which  it  was  situated,  availed  themselves 
of  this  opportunity  to  do  so,  and  purchased  the 
Charter  House  premises. 

Not  satisfied,  however,  with  the  buildings  which 
they  found  there,  they  determined  to  erect  a  new 
school  more  in  accordance  with  modern  educational 
and  sanitary  ideas.  The  first  stone  was  laid  in  June, 
1873,  by  the  late  Duke  of  Saxe-Coburg-Gotha,  then 
Duke  of  Edinburgh,  and  the  building  was  formally 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  335 

opened  by  the  Prince  and  Princess  of  Wales  on 
June  6,  1873.  It  occupies  the  northwest  corner  of 
Upper  Green,  and  is  a  fine  red  brick  and  stone 
building,  collegiate  gothic  in  style,  and  containing  a 
spacious  entrance  hall,  a  great  hall  on  the  first  floor,  a 
fine  large  schoolroom,  fifty  feet  in  length  by  thirty- 
two  in  breadth,  a  lecture  theatre,  classrooms  and  other 
apartments.  In  the  great  hall  stands  the  statue  of 
Sir  Thomas  White.  A  very  handsome  chimney-piece 
also  deserves  attention.  The  school  is  divided  into 
an  upper  and  a  lower  school.  The  curriculum  in- 
cludes Hebrew  as  well  as  classical  literature,  which  is 
unusual,  and,  since  1829,  modern  languages  as  well. 
Boys  are  admitted  at  any  age,  if  able  to  prove  effici- 
ency, but  only  those  who  entered  below  the  third  form 
are  eligible  for  the  university  fellowships.  They  can 
only  remain  until  the  Monday  after  St.  John  the 
Baptist's  Day  preceding  their  nineteenth  birthday. 
When  that  day  comes,  they  must,  whether  their 
studies  are  completed  or  not,  leave  the  institution. 
It  is  one  of  the  old  charter  rules,  but  is  still  strictly 
adhered  to.  Presentations  are  in  the  gift  of  the 
members  of  the  court  of  the  Merchant  Tailors  Com- 
pany. 

The  school  enjoys  thirty-seven  out  of  the  fifty 
fellowships  at  St.  John's  College,  Oxford,  founded  by 
Sir  Thomas  White,  besides  eight  so-called  exhibitions 
at  Oxford  and  six  at  Cambridge.  St.  Barnabas  (June 
11)  is  the  day  on  which  the  election  to  these  prefer- 


336  LONDON. 

ments  takes  place.  This  day  is  also  a  speech  day, 
and  the  day  on  which  the  prizes  are  distributed. 
There  is,  however,  another  ceremonial  day  in  Decem- 
ber, which  goes  by  the  name  of  "  Doctors'  Day." 
Both  are  occasions  of  importance,  and  the  audience 
always  numbers  the  officers  of  the  Merchant  Tailors 
Company,  and  other  distinguished  personages.  The 
boys  of  the  school  who  have  risen  to  eminence  are  too 
numerous  to  mention.  Among  the  number,  however, 
are  Edmund  Spenser,  the  great  poet ;  Edwin  Sandys, 
the  traveller ;  James  Shirley,  the  dramatist ;  Vicessi- 
mus  Knox,  the  essayist;  Charles  Mathews,  the 
comedian ;  Dr.  Samuel  Birch,  the  renowned  Egyp- 
tologist ;  Dr.  Francis  Hawkins,  the  physician ; 
twenty-one  bishops  of  the  Church  of  England,  ami 
other  eminent  divines,  judges  and  prominent  men. 

But  still  another  important  educational  institution 
had  its  inception  in  the  days  of  Elizabeth.  This 
institution  was  none  other  than  Gresham  College, 
named  after  Sir  Thomas  Gresham,  to  whom  London 
owed  the  Royal  Exchange,  on  condition  that  on  the 
demise  of  his  widow  certain  lectures  on  divinity,  civil 
law,  astronomy,  music,  geometry,  rhetoric  and  physic 
should  be  delivered  in  his  house,  and  that  it  should  be 
retained  and  kept  up  for  that  purpose.  Many  dis- 
tinguished men  have  been  lecturers  of  that  institution. 
These  include  no  less  a  person  than  Sir  Christopher 
Wren,  who,  in  1667,  succeeded  Dr.  Rooke  in  the  chair 
of  astronomy,  and  Dr.  Isaac  Barrow,  who  succeeded 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  TUDORS.  337 

to  the  chair  of  geometry  in  1662.  The  building 
seems  to  have  escaped  the  great  fire  of  1666,  for  it  is 
recorded  that  the  Royal  Exchange,  having  suffered 
destruction,  the  Exchange  was  temporarily  held  "  at 
Gresham  College."  The  place  having  ceased  to  meet 
the  requirements,  the  present  college  was  erected  in 
1843  from  the  designs  of  George  Smith,  Esquire — 
this  one  at  the  corner  of  Gresham  and  Basinghall 
Streets — and  the  first  lecture  in  the  new  building  was 
delivered  on  November  2  of  that  year.  The  lectures 
are  now  given  hi  the  evenings,  instead  of  during  the 
day,  this  being  done  to  facilitate  the  attendance  of 
clerks  and  other  employees,  the  college  having  become 
a  species  of  free  night  school.  The  lectures  on  music 
are  especially  popular,  and,  being  illustrative  as  well 
as  didactic,  attract  many  music  lovers. 

But  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  was  not  only  remark- 
able for  its  political  achievements  and  commercial 
successes,  but  also  because  it  was  an  age  notable  for 
the  greater  distinction  of  brilliancy  in  the  general 
tone  of  society;  but,  like  the  intellectual  tone  of 
society,  the  topographical  position  of  the  fashionable 
world  had  changed  greatly  under  Elizabeth.  It  was 
only  the  morals  which  seem  not  to  have  altered. 
Society  was  moving  westward,  Tower  Hill  was  now 
largely  abandoned,  and  the  Strand,  which  had  been 
paved  in  1532,  was  now  bordered  with  splendid  man- 
sions. While  it  had  long  been  highly  favored  by  the 
clergy — a  number  of  provincial  bishops  having  Lon- 
VOL.  I.— 22 


338  LONDON. 

don  residences  on  the  Strand,  with  gardens  sloping 
down  to  the  edge  of  the  Thames — it  required  the  ex- 
ample given  by  Protector  Somerset,  when  he  started 
operations  on  his  vast  residence  there,  to  give  the 
proper  impetus  to  the  social  migration.  Elizabeth 
herself,  who  disliked  St.  James  or  Whitehall  because 
of  their  associations,  greatly  affected  the  Strand,  and 
spent  much  of  her  time  at  Somerset  House,  where  she 
was  residing  at  the  time  of  her  famous  visit  to  the 
city  to  open  the  Royal  Exchange.  Here,  on  the 
Strand,  was  Arundel  House,  which  gave  its  name  to 
the  present  Arundel  Street,  in  which  splendid  resi- 
dence Thomas  Seymour,  lord  high  admiral  and 
brother  of  the  protector,  held  a  veritable  court,  and 
gave  sumptuous  entertainments.  Here  also  was  Cecil 
House,  the  mansion  of  Sir  William  Cecil,  the  great 
Lord  Burleigh,  lord  high  treasurer,  which  stood  on 
the  north  side  of  the  Strand,  on  the  site  of  the  pres- 
ent Burleigh  Street  and  the  old  Exeter  Change,  not 
far  opposite  from  where  Cecil  Street  now  finds  its  way 
to  the  Thames.  It  is '  described  as  being  a  "  verie 
fayre  howse,  raysed  with  brickes  proportionablie, 
adorned  with  four  turrets  placed  at  the  four  quarters 
of  the  howse,"  while  its  interior  is  said  to  have  been 
"  curiouslye  beautified  with  rare  devises."  Adjoining 
was  the  house  of  Sir  Robert  Cecil,  knight.  At  Cecil 
House,  Lord  Burleigh  gave  splendid  entertainments, 
which  were  attended  by  the  queen  and  court,  civic 
magnates  and  other  distinguished  persons.  There  is 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  339 

special  mention  made  of  a  supper  held  here  on  July 
14,  1561,  which  was  graced  by  the  presence  of  Eliza- 
beth, and  it  is  added  that  she  drove  thither  "  by  the 
fields  from  Christ  Church,"  from  which  we  may  con- 
clude that  what  is  now  Coveut  Garden  was  then  a 
wilderness. 

On  the  Strand  were  also  situated  other  fine  man- 
sions, including  Paget  House,  the  residence  of  Wil- 
liam, first  Lord  Paget,  and  afterwards  of  his  son 
Henry,  second  Lord  Paget;  and  Russell  House,  the 
residence  of  the  Earl  of  Bedford.  The  first  Russell 
House  was  on  the  south  side  of  the  Strand,  while  the 
later  mansion  was  situated  on  the  north  side  of  the 
street,  and  its  large  gardens,  which  extended  far  back 
of  it  to  the  neighborhood  of  Holborn,  were  the  scene 
of  many  a  festive  gathering.  On  the  site  of  the 
present  Cecil  Street  and  Salisbury  Street,  between  the 
mansions  of  the  Bishops  of  Worcester  and  Durham, 
stood  Salisbury  House,  so  named  after  Sir  Robert 
Cecil,  Earl  of  Salisbury,  who  built  it.  The  house- 
warming  took  place  on  December  6,  1602,  though 
the  house  was  scarcely  finished,  and  was  attended  by 
Queen  Elizabeth — probably  one  of  the  last  functions 
at  which  she  was  ever  present,  as  she  died  the  follow- 
ing March.  Lastly,  but  by  no  means  leastly,  mention 
must  be  made  of  Suffolk  House,  the  residence  of  the 
Duke  of  Suffolk,  and  which  stood  even  further  west 
than  Charing  Cross,  on  the  site  which  was  afterwards 
occupied  by  Northampton  House,  and  later  still  by 


340  LONDON. 

Northumberland  House.  Others  had  gone  even  fur- 
ther west,  and  Tothill  Street,  Westminster,  and  the 
neighboring  streets  had  become  a  distinctly  fashion- 
able locality.  Thus,  while  we  find  Lord  Grey  de 
Wilton,  Lord  Dacre  and  Sir  George  Carew  living  in 
Tothill  Street,  Canon  How  contained  the  residences 
of  the  Earl  of  Derby,  the  Earl  of  Sussex,  and  that 
of  Anne,  Duchess  of  Somerset,  mother  of  the  Earl  of 
Hereford. 

It  must  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  all  of 
society  had  moved  westward,  for  Finsbury  was  still 
quite  the  style  and  remained  a  favorite  Sunday  walk. 
The  Marquis  of  Winchester  had  his  house  in  Old 
Broad  Street,  on  the  site  of  the  former  house  and 
gardens  of  the  Augustinian  Friars;  Sir  Thomas 
Gresham  resided,  as  we  have  seen,  not  far  distant,  in 
Bishopsgate  Street ;  while  that  extraordinary  woman, 
Catherine,  Duchess  of  Suffolk,  held  a  species  of  salon 
at  her  house  in  the  Barbican,  right  off  Finsbury 
Circus,  in  which  street  was  also  situated  the  residence 
of  the  Spanish  ambassador.  Things  seem  indeed  to 
have  been  distinctly  scattered,  for  we  find  the  Earl 
of  Abergavenny  living  at  Abergavenny  House,  in  Ave 
Maria  Lane,  off  St.  Paul's  churchyard ;  the  Earl  of 
Rutland  inhabiting  a  house  at  Puddle  Dock,  at  the 
foot  of  St.  Andrew's  Hill,  near  Upper  Thames  Street ; 
Lord  Keeper  Bacon  at  Bacon  House,  Foster  Lane, 
Cheapside ;  and  Sir  Christopher  Hatton  giving  grand 
entertainments  in  Hatton  House,  Ely  Place,  Holborn. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  341 

It  is  not  only  the  splendid  mansions  and  the  lavish 
entertaining  which  make  the  age  of  Elizabeth  of  so 
great  an  importance  in  the  history  of  society;  it  is 
the  illustrious  names  in  philosophy,  literature  and 
adventure  which  give  it  a  brilliancy  peculiarly  its 
own.  The  extensive  voyages  of  Sir  Walter  Raleigh, 
of  Drake,  of  Cavendish,  and  other  eminent  navi- 
gators, not  only  shed  great  lustre  on  her  reign,  but 
prepared  the  way  for  that  colonization  which  has 
been  and  is  one  of  the  greatest  sources  of  England's 
prosperity.  While  Bacon  was  giving  to  the  world  a 
new  thought  in  his  philosophy,  Shakespeare,  that  im- 
mortal genius,  was  bringing  the  drama  to  its  highest 
level,  Spenser  was  adding  harmonies  to  English 
poetry  and  Hooker  beauties  to  English  prose, 
Ascham  was  evolving  his  treatise  on  archery,  Stow 
was  completing  his  famous  survey  of  London,  Cam- 
den  was  immersed  in  his  antiquarian  studies,  Cotton 
was  founding  his  famous  library,  Ben  Jonson  was 
emulating  the  bard  of  Avon,  and  Marlowe,  Beaumont 
and  Fletcher  were  following  this  illustrious  example. 

The  theatre,  as  well  as  the  tavern,  had  now  taken 
its  place  among  the  institutions  of  English  social  life. 
The  first  place  of  public  entertainment,  purposely 
constructed  for  theatrical  performances,  was  known  as 
"The  Theatre,"  Holy  well  Lane,  Shoreditch.  The 
ground  was  described  as  "  certain  howsing  and  void 
grounds  lying  and  being  in  Holy  well,  in  the  county 
of  Middlesex,"  leased  April  13,  1576,  by  one  "Giles 


342  LONDON. 

Allein,  of  Haseleigh,  in  Essex,  gentleman,  to  one 
James  Burbage,  late  of  London,  joiner,  for  the  period 
of  twenty-one  years."  The  house  was  erected  at  the 
cost  of  John  Braynes,  the  father-in-law  of  Burbage, 
who  advanced  the  money  on  condition  that  he  should 
enjoy  half  the  profits  of  the  contemplated  house. 
The  opening  of  the  playhouse,  which  is  said  to  have 
occupied  the  exact  site  of  the  present  Standard  The- 
atre, seems  to  have  been  the  signal  for  a  series  of 
commotions  and  riots  among  the  people  of  the  neigh- 
borhood, and  an  indictment  was  preferred  against 
Braynes  and  Burbage  during  the  reign  of  Elizabeth 
on  account  of  the  disorders  due  to  the  existence  of 
their  theatre.  Nor  does  the  venture  seem  to  have 
been  particularly  successful,  since  we  find  that,  after 
the  death  of  Braynes,  his  widow  was  compelled  to 
commence  proceedings  to  enforce  the  fulfillment  of 
the  contract.  Indeed,  things  went  so  far  that  it  finally 
ended  by  Burbage's  son,  Cuthbert,  causing  the  build- 
ing to  be  demolished,  and  erected  at  Bankside,  South- 
wark.  This  occurred  in  1598,  and  the  new  theatre 
was  then  named  the  Globe,  and  became  the  summer 
theatre  of  Shakespeare  and  his  fellows. 

But  Burbage,  the  father,  seems  to  have  been  an 
enterprising  man;  for,  not  satisfied  with  his  first  ven- 
ture, we  find  that,  before  the  last  event  above  re- 
corded, he  had  purchased  from  Sir  William  More, 
of  Loseley,  a  large  portion  of  a  house  in  the  pre- 
cincts of  Blackfriars,  formerly  the  property  of  Sir 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  343 

Thomas  Cawarden,  master  of  the  revels,  and  this 
Burbage  transformed  into  a  theatre.  The  deed  is 
dated  February  4,  1596,  and  the  theatre,  which  came 
to  be  known  as  Blackfriars  Theatre,  was,  it  would 
appear,  opened  the  following  year.  The  theatre  went 
through  a  series  of  vicissitudes,  and  passed  into  a 
number  of  different  hands.  In  1619  the  city  author- 
ities ordered  it  closed,  because  of  the  petition  of  the 
neighbors,  who  complained  of  the  "  blocking  up  of 
the  thoroughfare  occasioned  by  the  great  resort  of 
people."  In  1629  a  mixed  company  of  French  play- 
ers performed  here,  and  met  with  but  a  poor  recep- 
tion ;  and  in  1635  it  was  leased  by  the  Burbage  heirs 
to  one  Henry  Evans  for  the  performances  of  the  chil- 
dren of  the  chapel ;  and,  after  the  departure  of  the 
children,  the  king's  servants  seem  to  have  acted  here. 
The  theatre  was  closed  a  second  time,  when,  under  the 
ordinance  of  the  Lords  and  Commons,  September  2, 
1642,  all  "public  stage  plays"  were  suppressed.  A 
few  years  later,  on  August  5,  1655,  the  building  was 
pulled  down,  and  tenements  erected  on  the  site,  part  of 
which  still  retains  the  appellation  of  Playhouse  Yard. 
Holywell  Lane,  Shoreditch,  seems,  however,  to  have 
been  a  very  favorite  place  for  theatrical  representa- 
tions, for  here  Avas  another  famous  playhouse  which 
went  by  the  name  of  "the  Curtain,"  or,  as  originally 
spelled,  "  the  Curtayne,"  from  a  piece  of  ground  of 
that  name  which  had  formerly  appertained  to  the 
priory  of  Halliwell,  then  dissolved.  Another  famous 


344  LONDON. 

playhouse  of  that  day  was  the  Fortune  Theatre,  which 
had  been  built  for  Philip  Henslowe  and  Edward 
Alleyn,  who  here  acted  with  their  company  of  players.  It 
stood  on  the  east  side  of  Golding,  now  Golden  Lane,  be- 
tween it  and  what  now  bears  the  name  of  Upper  White- 
house  Street,  in  the  parish  of  St.  Giles,  Cripplegate. 

But  if  theatres  entered  upon  their  career  of  public 
utility  during  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  the  taverns  were, 
if  not  at  their  zenith,  yet  far  on  in  their  ascendency. 
The  Mitre  continued  to  be,  and  the  Bull's  Head,  also 
in  the  Cheap,  became  immensely  popular  resorts.  The 
former,  as  has  already  been  said,  stood  at  the  corner 
of  Bread  Street,  a  little  back  from  the  street  itself,  be- 
ing accessible  also  by  a  direct  passageway  in  the  rear. 
This  famous  drinking  house  is  as  celebrated  perhaps 
for  the  allusions  made  to  it  in  the  writings  of  noted 
men  and  general  literature,  as  it  is  for  the  celebrities 
who  actually  congregated  there.  It  was  destroyed 
during  the  great  fire  and  not  rebuilt.  The  Bull's 
Head  also  makes  frequent  appearances  in  literature, 
and  was  deservedly  popular.  It  also  had  an  entrance 
on  Bread  Street,  and  the  present  Bull  Head  Inn,  at 
No.  3  Bread  Street,  is  probably  its  direct  successor. 
The  Nag's  Head,  which  stood  also  on  the  Cheap,  at 
the  corner  of  Friday  Street,  was  distinguished  from 
the  adjoining  houses  by  a  nag's  head  in  stone,  which 
adorned  the  front  of  the  house.  It  is  here,  in  this 
famous  tavern,  that  the  fictitious  consecration  of  the 
Elizabethan  bishops  is  supposed  to  have  occurred. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  TUDORS.  345 

The  taverns  of  West  Cheap  had,  however,  a  potent 
rival  in  the  Boar's  Head,  in  East  Cheap,  which  stood 
in  what  was  known  as  Great  East  Cheap,  between 
Small  Alley  and  St.  Michael's  Lane,  there  being  four 
taverns  side  by  side  in  the  block — the  Chicken,  nearest 
to  St.  Michael's  Alley,  the  Boar's  Head,  the  Plough 
and  the  Three  Kings.  The  most  famous,  from  the 
fact  that  it  has  been  commemorated  by  Shakespeare,  is 
the  Boar's  Head.  The  back  windows  looked  out  on 
the  churchyard  of  St.  Michael's,  Crooked  Lane.  The 
statue  of  William  IV.  marks  the  site  upon  which  it 
stood.  Destroyed  during  the  great  fire  of  166G,  it 
was  immediately  rebuilt,  the  new  building  being  of 
brick.  The  door  was  in  the  centre,  and  over  it  a 
window,  over  which  again  was  a  boar's  head,  cut  in 
stone.  On  each  side  of  the  entrance  was  a  wooden 
carving,  in  imitation  of  a  vine  branch,  on  the  top  of 
which  was  a  diminutive  Falstaff,  in  honor  of  him  who 
is  said  to  have  been  an  habitue  thereof.  The  place 
grew  dilapidated  and  became  a  gunsmith's  shop,  and 
was  finally  torn  down;  but  the  stone  on  which  was  the 
boar's  head  is  now  preserved  in  the  museum  of  the 
Guildhall. 

The  south  side  of  the  river,  which  had  acquired  the 
name  of  Bankside,  had  become  very  popular  as  a  re- 
sort among  pleasure  lovers.  The  Bankside  proper 
was  that  strip  of  ground  on  the  river  bank,  between 
what  was  called  "  Banksend,"  by  Barclay's  brewery, 
and  "  Bankend,"  by  the  Castle  or  Falcon,  near  Black- 


346  LONDON. 

friars  Bridge.  It  boasted  of  a  number  of  playhouses, 
of  which  we  have  already  seen  the  Globe  Theatre  was 
one.  It  had  also  its  full  quota  of  taverns,  of  which 
the  most  famous  was  perhaps  the  Falcon,  which  was 
much  frequented  by  Shakespeare  and  his  friends. 
The  Walnut  Tree  Tavern  was  not  far  away,  in  Tooley 
Street;  but  perhaps  the  greatest  attraction  was  the 
Bear  Garden,  a  "  royal  garden  and  amphitheatre  for 
the  exhibition  of  bear  and  bull  baitings,"  a  sport 
which,  strange  to  say,  remained  a  favorite  amusement 
with  the  people  of  England  up  to  the  time  of  William 
and  Mary.  Indeed,  it  was  considered  quite  the  thing 
that  the  "  grand  monde  "  should  be  present  at  these 
performances,  and  royalty  itself  did  not  disdain  to  at- 
tend. It  was  one  of  the  first  things  a  new  ambassador 
was  taken  to  see ;  and  it  is  related  that  here  Elizabeth 
brought  the  Spanish  ambassador,  at  the  time  that 
Europe  was  ringing  with  the  first  news  of  Drake's 
successes  in  the  Pacific,  in  order,  it  is  asserted,  to  find 
out  from  him,  in  the  intervals  of  the  sport,  what 
Philip  II.  really  thought  in  regard  to  the  matter. 
Here  at  Bankside  many  prominent  actors  resided,  in- 
cluding Kemp,  Beaumont  and  Fletcher,  Edward 
Shakespeare,  William's  younger  brother,  and  Edward 
Alleyn,  who  became  Henslowe's  partner  and  suc- 
ceeded him.  All  these,  and  others  besides,  resided 
there.  It  was,  in  fact,  a  species  of  London  "Quartier 
Latin  "  during  the  Elizabethan  period. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUAETS.      347 


CHAPTER  IX. 

LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS. 

Arrival  of  James  I. — The  Plague  Detains  Him  at  the  Charter 
House — The  Gunpowder  Plot — The  King's  Wrangles  with  Par- 
liament— The  Proclamations  Against  Building — Last  Changes 
in  the  City  Precincts— Difficulties  of  the  Apothecaries — The 
King's  Threat  of  Moving — The  Lord  Mayor's  Reply — Preachers 
Supplant  Parish  Rectors — The  New  Exchange — Foundation  of 
the  Charter  House  Hospital — Charles  I. — His  Trouble  with  the 
Parliament — The  Spoliation  of  the  Churches — The  King's  Visit 
to  Guildhall — The  Execution  of  Laud — The  Army  Council  at 
Windsor — The  King  in  London — The  Trial  at  Westminster 
Hall— The  Execution  of  Charles  I.— The  Dissolution  of  Parlia- 
ment—Cromwell as  Lord  Protector — His  Death— Changes  in 
London — Foundation  of  Sion  College — Lincoln's  Inn  Fields — 
Covent  Garden— Inigo  Jones— The  Building  of  the  Piazza— St. 
Paul's,  Covent  Garden — The  Court  at  St.  James— Making  the 
Mall— Pall  Mall— Birdcage  Walk— Fashion  Going  Westward- 
Society  in  the  City— The  Earl  of  Northumberland  at  the 
Minories — Sir  William  Cockayne  at  Old  Broad  Street— Sir  Paul 
Pindar  in  Bishopsgate  Street — Aldersgate  Street—  Peter  House 
— Thanet  House— Lady  Hatton  and  Gondomar,  the  Spanish 
Ambassador,  in  Ely  Place— Their  Quarrels  and  Difficulties — 
Lady  Hatton's  Peculiar  Parties — Brooke  House  in  Holborn — 
Southampton  House — Weld  House  in  Lincoln's  Inn  Fields — 
Great  Houses  on  the  Strand — Exeter  House — Dorset  House — 
Bedford  House— Northampton  House— Suffolk  House— Wal- 
lingford  House,  Whitehall — Berkshire  House — St.  James' — 
Fashion  in  Covent  Garden— Clare  House — Conde  di  Ornate, 
the  Spanish  Ambassador,  in  Long  Acre — Leicester  House,  in 


348  LONDON. 

Leicester  Fields  —  Tothill  and  Canon  Row,  Westminster  — 
Anne,  Countess  of  Dorset,  in  Dorset  House — Popular  Amuse- 
ments— St.  James'  Fair — Cockfighting  Licenses — The  Cockpit 
at  Whitehall — The  Cockpit  in  Drury  Lane  Becomes  the  Phoenix 
Theatre— Other  Theatres  of  the  Early  Stuart  Period— White- 
friars  Theatre — The  Salisbury  Court  Theatre — The  Dorset 
Gardens  Theatre — The  Hope  Theatre,  Bankside — The  Taverns 
— Garraway's  Coffee  House,  Change  Alley — The  Mermaid,  in 
Bread  Street,  Cheap— The  First  Tea  Room  in  London— Old 
Fish  Street  and  its  Public  Houses — "La  Belle  Sauvage,"  in 
Ludgate  Hill— The  Story  of  the  Queen  of  Sheba— The  Legend 
of  Pocahontas — Her  Presentation  at  Court — Her  Death  at 
Gravesend — The  Devil's  Tavern,  at  Temple  Bar — Jonson's 
"  Leges  Conviviales "  — Sale  of  the  Duchess  of  Richmond's 
Jewels— The  Swan,  at  Charing  Cross— The  Blue  Boar,  in  Hoi- 
bom — Taylor's  Tavern — Wills  Coffee  House,  in  Covent  Garden 
— Dryden's  Court  and  Coterie — Taverns  in  Westminster — The 
Rota  Club,  at  the  Turk's  Head— Suburban  Inns— The  Angel, 
at  Islington— Dangers  of  the  High  Roads— The  Elephant  and 
Castle— The  Legend  of  the  Infanta  del  Castillo— The  King's 
Spring  Gardens  at  Whitehall— First  Opening  of  Vauxhall  at 
Lambeth— Piccadilly— Piccadilly  Hall— Shaver's  Hall— Street 
Scenes  in  the  Early  Stuart  Days— The  First  Hackney  Coaches 
at  the  Maypole,  in  the  Strand— Illustrious  Names  of  the  Early 
Stuart  Period. 

THE  crown  was  never  transmitted  with  greater 
tranquillity  than  when  it  passed  from  Elizabeth  to 
James  I.  Elizabeth  died  at  Richmond,  as  we  have 
seen,  on  March  24,  1603,  at  two  in  the  morning.  At 
ten  o'clock  the  same  day  Sir  Robert  Peel  proclaimed 
James  King  of  England,  in  the  presence  of  some 
of  the  chief  nobility  of  the  kingdom.  The  whole 
country  seemed  united  in  greeting  the  King  of 
the  Scots  as  the  legitimate  heir  to  the  throne,  and 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUAETS.  349 

received  him  with  every  mark  of  rejoicing  and 
respect.  Nor  was  London  backward  in  its  manifesta- 
tions of  joy  and  pleasure.  Hardly  had  the  popular 
lamentation  over  Elizabeth  subsided  before  Robert 
Lee,  then  lord  mayor,  caused  the  heralds  to  proclaim 
on  the  Cheap  and  other  usual  places  the  accession  of 
her  successor.  James,  like  Elizabeth,  appreciated 
most  highly  the  importance  of  the  city's  loyalty,  and 
wrote  at  once  to  thank  the  lord  mayor  for  his  prompt- 
ness in  acknowledging  him  as  the  new  sovereign.  The 
king  started  from  Edinburgh  on  April  5,  to  take  pos- 
session of  the  throne.  At  Waltham  he  was  met  by 
one  of  the  city's  sheriffs,  the  other  being  ill,  and,  when 
he  arrived  some  days  later  at  the  gates  of  London,  he 
was  met  by  the  lord  mayor  in  person,  the  aldermen 
and  other  civic  officials,  who  greeted  him  in  the  name 
of  the  city.  The  plague  was,  however,  raging  with 
great  virulence,  and  James  prudently  refrained  from 
entering  London,  and  determined  to  take  up  his  resi- 
dence at  the  Charter  House,  outside  of  the  city,  and 
to  defer  his  state  entry  until  the  pestilence  should  have 
subsided.  The  epidemic,  however,  continued  with 
great  violence,  and  it  is  computed  that  thousands 
of  people  died  of  the  dread  disease  during  the 
year.  James  thought,  and  that  wisely,  that  it  was 
imperative  that  some  measures  should  be  taken  to 
allay  the  course  of  the  scourge.  It  was  therefore 
enacted  that  no  houses  should  be  built  in  the  suburbs, 
that  the  theatres  should  be  closed,  and  that  the  hold- 


350  LONDON. 

ing  of  Bartholomew's  fair  should  be  forbidden  until 
the  epidemic  had  been  suppressed. 

The  autumn  witnessed  new  disturbances  in  the 
Main  Plot,  conceived  by  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  and  Lord 
Cobham  to  place  Arabella  Stuart,  the  king's  cousin, 
on  the  throne,  and  that  plot,  which  has  since  been 
designated  as  the  "Surprise,"  had  as  its  object  the 
imprisonment  of  the  king,  the  royal  family  and  the 
remodelment  of  the  government.  Both  conspiracies 
leaked  out,  however,  and  the  principals  and  not  a 
few  of  their  accomplices  having  been  apprehended, 
were  condemned  to  death.  Cobham,  Grey  and  Mark- 
ham  were  pardoned,  but  Raleigh  was  only  reprieved 
and  sent  to  the  Towrer,  where  he  remained  many  years. 
In  the  meanwhile  the  disputes  between  the  Church 
party  and  the  Puritans  reached  such  a  pitch  that  the 
king  felt  it  necessary  to  call  a  conference  and  appoint, 
as  it  were,  a  court  of  inquiry  to  look  into  the  dis- 
turbance, and  exact  measures  which  might  reconcile 
both  parties. 

With  the  coming  of  the  cold  weather,  however,  the 
plague  seemed  to  have  been  gotten  under  control,  and 
to  have,  as  it  were,  burned  itself  out,  and  things  gen- 
erally to  present  a  quieter  aspect.  In  January,  1604, 
arrangements  were  begun  for  the  king's  state  entry 
into  the  city,  and  the  date  of  the  coronation  was  set 
for  February  26  of  the  same  year.  The  plans  agreed 
upon  were  of  a  very  magnificent  character ;  but  when 
the  time  came  the  plague  renewed  its  ravages,  and  it 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      351 

was  found  necessary  to  forego  the  royal  entry,  so  that 
the  custom,  so  long  in  practice,  that  the  sovereign 
should  spend  the  night  preceding  the  coronation  at 
the  Tower,  was  broken  through  and  the  procession 
from  that  fortress  to  Westminster  omitted.  At  West- 
minster the  open-air  exercises  were  also  abandoned, 
but  the  coronation  service  itself  was  conducted  on  the 
usual  scale  of  splendor. 

The  first  years  of  the  new  reign  were,  comparatively 
speaking,  uneventful  as  regards  civic  history.  The 
loan  which  the  king  negotiated  of  sixty  thousand 
pounds,  the  granting  of  a  charter  to  the  London  of 
South  Virginia  and  Plymouth  Company,  the  renewal 
of  the  charter  of  the  East  India  Company,  the  settle- 
ment of  that  much-debated  question  of  metage,  the 
confirmation  by  royal  charter  of  the  Thames  Con- 
servancy, and  the  cleansing  for  the  last  time  of  the  old 
fosse  around  the  walls,  were  the  chief  civic  events  of 
the  time.  Meanwhile  the  conference  called  by  the 
king  at  Hampton  Court,  to  discuss  the  disputes  be- 
tween the  Church  and  the  Puritans,  had  not  had  the 
results  anticipated.  The  Catholics  had  expected  much 
favor  on  the  accession  of  the  Stuarts,  but  the  rigorous 
measures  adopted  against  them  under  Elizabeth  were 
not  relaxed.  These  conditions  led  to  the  "  Gunpowder 
Plot,"  which,  though  it  was  discovered  in  time  to 
prevent  its  execution,  yet  was  of  such  great  propor- 
tions and  so  far-reaching  in  its  influence  that  it  stirred 
London  to  its  inmost  centre.  Guy  Fawkes,  though 


352  LONDON. 

only  an  agent  in  the  matter,  was  tried  and  hanged 
January  31,  1606.  Catesby,  Percy  and  others  impli- 
cated sought  refuge  under  the  roof  of  Sir  Edward 
Digby,  in  Warwickshire,  but,  being  pursued,  they  fled 
to  Holbeach  in  Staffordshire,  where  they  hoped  to 
cause  a  rising  among  the  Catholics.  They  were  fol- 
lowed, and  the  house  in  which  they  concealed  them- 
selves surrounded.  In  the  encounter  which  followed 
Digby  himself,  Rookwood,  Winter  and  others  were 
taken  prisoners  and  suffered  the  death  penalty  at 
the  hands  of  the  executioners.  On  January  30,  31 
of  the  same  year  Gerard  suffered  a  similar  fate,  and 
Tresham  was  committed  to  the  Tower,  where  he  died 
on  December  27.  After  this  came  the  king's  struggle 
with  Parliament,  the  Irish  colonization  scheme,  the 
creation  of  the  Order  of  Baronets,  which  followed  each 
other  in  rapid  succession.  Of  two  events  which  hap- 
pened within  a  year  of  each  other,  the  first  brought 
sorrow,  the  second  joy  to  London  and  its  citizens. 
The  death  of  Henry,  Prince  of  Wales,  then  in  his 
nineteenth  year,  which  occurred  on  November  5, 
1612,  was  mourned  by  the  city  as  well  as  the  nation, 
and  the  marriage  of  the  Princess  Elizabeth  with 
Frederick,  Elector  Palatine,  was  the  source  of  civic  as 
well  as  national  rejoicings. 

Though  James  had  been  received  with  unrestrained 
loyalty  on  his  arrival  in  England,  he  did  not,  either 
through  his  misfortune  or  through  his  fault,  long 
retain  his  popularity.  His  wrangles  with  Parliament 


Hampton  Court  Palace 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      353 

had  already  impaired  it,  and  it  was  additionally  dam- 
aged by  his  marked  favoritism  for  Robert  Carr  and 
George  Villiers.  He  created  the  former  Earl  of  Somer- 
set and  the  latter  Duke  of  Buckingham,  granted  to  each 
in  succession  his  most  intimate  confidence,  and  con- 
ferred upon  them  the  highest  honors  in  the  State,  and 
by  so  doing  greatly  aroused  the  jealousy  and  anger  of 
those  who,  being  older  peers  of  the  realm,  deemed 
themselves  more  eligible  to  such  offices.  In  the  two 
new  creations  James,  however,  followed  a  well-deter- 
mined policy.  The  number  of  members  of  the  Upper 
House  was  much  diminished,  for  the  wholesale  execu- 
tions of  the  preceding  reigns  had  greatly  depleted  its 
ranks,  and  their  jealous  policy  had  so  lessened  its  influ- 
ence as  to  render  it  completely  subordinate  to  the 
Commons.  James  felt  that,  of  its  remaining  members, 
the  older  peers  owed  nothing  to  him  or  to  his  house, 
and  that,  to  counterbalance  the  power  of  the  Com- 
mons, a  new  and  augmented  nobility  was  necessary. 
This  measure  naturally  met  with  much  opposition 
from  the  already  existing  peers,  who  felt  that  the 
dignity  of  their  rank  was  being  cheapened  by  the 
multiplication  ad  wfinitum  of  the  numbers  of  their 
order.  Already,  in  1611,  James  had,  by  the  creation 
of  the  Order  of  Baronets — the  recipients  of  which  new 
honor  were  to  help  financially  in  the  king's  scheme 
for  the  regeneration  and  civilization  of  the  Irish  by 
colonization  from  England — greatly  antagonized  and 
irritated  the  peers,  who  saw  their  prerogatives 
VOL.  I.— 23 


354  LONDON. 

encroached  upon  and  threatened  by  a  new  degree  in 
the  scale  of  rank ;  nor  had  the  negotiations  which 
James  had  entered  into  for  the  marriage  of  his  son  to 
a  Spanish  Infanta  met  in  any  way  with  public  ap- 
proval, while  the  execution  of  Raleigh  on  his  return 
from  Guiana,  which  execution  took  place  on  October 
29,  1618,  added  another  to  the  long  list  of  tragedies 
which  had  Whitehall  as  their  stage,  and  greatly  in- 
creased the  gloom  of  the  times.  General  dissatisfac- 
tion existed  also  throughout  the  land,  because  of  the 
king's  inactivity  in  the  matter  of  helping  the  Elector 
Palatine,  his  son-in-law,  to  secure  the  crown  of 
Bohemia  and  defend  the  Palatinate.  The  king's 
method  of  replenishing  the  peerage  was  that  measure, 
however,  which  was  calculated  to  cause  the  most 
bitter  dissatisfaction  among  the  natural  supporters  of 
the  crown,  and  the  Upper  House,  in  1621,  finally 
solemnly  protested  against  the  making  of  such  a  mul- 
titude of  Scotch  and  Irish  lords;  nor  did  the  king's 
continued  quarrel  with  the  Commons  enhance  his 
prestige  in  that  direction.  Indeed,  in  all  his  measures 
James  seemed  to  have  been  most  unfortunate,  and  the 
alliances  which  he  formed  were  all  founded  on  a 
system  of  enmity  to  the  Imperial  House.  But  the 
end  was  not  far  distant.  Early  in  the  spring  of  1625 
James  was  seized  with  the  tertian  ague,  and,  after 
several  fits,  expired  on  March  27  of  that  year,  after  a 
reign  in  England  of  twenty-two  years  and  in  the 
fifty-ninth  year  of  his  age. 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.  355 

The  civic  events  of  the  first  years  of  James'  reign 
have  already  been  enumerated,  but  what  is  especially 
remarkable  are  the  continued  proclamations  issued 
against  the  increase  of  building,  more  especially  in 
the  suburbs,  and  one  would  have  supposed  that  the 
extension  of  the  city's  suburbs  would  have  been  re- 
garded as  a  safeguard  against  the  constantly  recurring 
visitation  of  the  plague ;  but  this  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  taken  into  consideration,  and  the  prohibi- 
tory proclamations  followed  each  other  in  close  succes- 
sion. They  certainly  prevented  the  development  of 
the  suburban  districts,  but  they  operated  in  a  way 
which  was  perhaps  unforeseen,  for  their  effect  was  to 
drive  settlers  to  remote  villages,  such  as  were  then 
Islington,  Greenwich  and  Mary-le-Bourne  (Maryle- 
bone).  There  were,  however,  two  slight  alterations 
in  the  city's  boundaries  during  the  reign  just  men- 
tioned, and  these  were  occasioned  by  the  anomalous 
status  of  the  sites  of  former  monastic  establishments. 
Thus,  as  far  back  as  1570,  a  contention  had  arisen  as 
to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  lord  mayor  over  Ely  Place, 
in  Holborn,  but  the  matter  had  been  brought  to  a 
settlement  by  a  recognition  of  that  site  as  part  of  the 
city  precincts.  Thus  James  I.,  in  his  second  charter, 
specifies  those  religious  houses,  the  sites  of  which 
were  thereafter  to  be  regarded  as  within  the  city's 
boundaries.  These  included  that  of  the  dissolved 
priory  of  the  Holy  Trinity  at  Aldgate,  St.  Bartholo- 
mew's at  Smithfield,  Blackfriars  in  Castle  Bayuard 


356  LONDON. 

Ward,  Whitefriars  in  Farringdon  Without,  and  the 
minor  liberty  of  Cold  Herberge,  commonly  called 
Cold  Harbor.  Curiously  enough,  however,  the  in- 
habitants of  these  districts  were  exempt  from  certain 
taxes,  and  from  the  duty  of  holding  certain  civil 
offices. 

Loyal  as  the  city  had  seemed  at  the  time  of  James' 
accession,  yet  the  king  and  the  city  were  not  always 
on  amicable  terms.  The  king  should  certainly  have 
been  esteemed  by  the  city  companies,  for  his  gener- 
osity in  the  matter  of  charters  seems  to  have  been 
almost  without  parallel,  and  no  less  than  nine  of  the 
city  companies  owe  their  charters  of  incorporation  to 
his  munificence.  Though  not  actually  then  incorpor- 
ated, yet  it  was  in  1603,  just  after  the  accession  of 
James  I.,  that  the  Fellow  Porters  organized  them- 
selves into  a  confraternity.  In  1604  both  the  Turners 
and  the  Musicians  obtained  their  charters ;  the  follow- 
ing year  the  Curriers  obtained  theirs,  and  a  year  later 
witnessed  the  incorporation  of  the  Fruiterers.  In 
1611  James  granted  a  charter  to  the  Plumbers,  and  in 
1616  to  the  Scriveners  Company.  In  1620  the  Bow- 
yers  secured  their  charter  from  the  same  source,  and 
in  1623,  just  before  his  death,  James  granted  a  char- 
ter to  the  Gold  and  Silver  Wire  Drawers.  But  the 
charter  which  was  the  cause  of  the  most  discussion 
and  unpleasantness  was  that  granted  in  1617  to  the 
Apothecaries,  whereby  these  latter  were  separated 
from  the  Grocers,  with  whom  they  had  previously 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.  357 

been  united.  The  separation  was  effected  through  the 
efforts  of  one  Gideon  de  Laune,  who  held  the  post  of 
apothecary  to  James  I.,  and  who  obtained  the  much- 
desired  severance  and  independence  for  the  body  of 
which  he  was  a  member.  The  charter  itself  expresses 
the  desire  of  the  Apothecaries  to  be  dissociated  from 
the  Grocers,  and  states  the  reason  for  this  wish  to  be 
because  of  "  the  ignorance  and  rashness  of  presumptu- 
ous empirics,"  and  the  necessity  that  "  ignorant  and 
unexpert  men  may  be  restrained,"  for  by  their  con- 
duct "  many  discommodities,  inconveniences  and 
perils  do  daily  arise  to  the  rude  and  incredulous 
people."  The  civic  authorities  seem,  however,  not  to 
have  approved  of  this  arrangement,  and  to  have  re- 
fused to  enroll  the  charter  or  recognize  the  Apothe- 
caries in  their  new  and  independent  character.  No 
other  charter,  save  that  by  which  a  century  later  the 
Surgeons  were  separated  from  the  Barbers,  ever 
caused  such  strife  and  dissension.  Finally  the  king, 
who  had  by  this  time  become  seriously  angered  and 
affronted,  wrote  a  letter  to  the  lord  mayor,  in  which, 
after  stating  that  he  had  learned  with  great  surprise 
and  profound  indignation  that  the  charter  which  he 
had  granted  to  the  Apothecaries  was  as  yet  uneu- 
rolled,  ordered  its  immediate  recognition.  Thus  did 
the  Apothecaries  triumph. 

The  king's  dissensions  and  difficulties  with  the  city 
reached  their  climax  on  the  attempt  made  by  him  to 
raise,  by  a  "  beneficence,"  the  sum  necessary  to  prose- 


358  LONDON. 

cute  the  war  in  defence  of  the  Palatinate,  and  when 
he,  having  met  with  serious  opposition  from  the  city, 
threatened  to  remove  himself  and  his  court,  and  all 
the  records  of  the  Tower  and  the  Courts  of  Justice 
at  Westminster  Hall,  to  another  place,  the  lord 
mayor — then  Sir  Edward  Barkham — after  listening 
to  the  king  until  the  end,  calmly  replied  that  he  full 
well  knew  the  king  to  have  the  power  to  carry  out 
his  threat,  and  that  the  city  of  London  would  humbly 
bow  to  the  king's  decision ;  his  only  request,  made  in 
his  name  and  in  that  of  his  fellow-citizens,  being  that, 
in  so  general  a  moving,  the  king  would  deign  to  leave 
the  river  in  its  accustomed  place.  Nor  was  this  the 
only  indignity  to  which  James  I.  was  subjected  at  the 
hands  of  a  lord  mayor,  for,  on  another  occasion, 
George  Bolles,  at  the  time  the  occupant  of  the  mayoral 
throne,  went  so  far  as  to  actually  stop  the  king's  car- 
riage while  he  was  driving  to  divine  service,  in  order 
that  he  (the  mayor)  might  speak  to  him,  at  which  the 
king  was  "  bitterly  enraged,"  and  inquired  "  how 
many  kings  "  there  were  in  England  besides  himself. 
Nor  was  the  king  the  only  one  to  be  affronted, 
for  persons  connected  with  the  court  met  with  far 
more  unpleasant  experiences  on  their  appearing  in  the 
city  ;  and  on  a  certain  famous  occasion  that  illustrious 
personage,  the  Count  Gondomar,  the  Spanish  ambas- 
sador, had  a  most  trying  time  of  it ;  and  the  king, 
feeling  keenly  the  slight  on  so  eminent  a  guest,  com- 
manded the  then  lord  mayor,  Sir  Martin  Lumley,  to 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUAETS.      359 

attend  him  at  Guildhall,  whither  he  went  himself  to 
reprimand  the  corporation  and  the  citizens  for  so  out- 
rageous a  behavior. 

To  the  disquietudes  occasioned  by  these  unpleasant- 
nesses must  be  added  those  religious  controversies 
which  still  continued,  during  the  whole  of  James' 
reign,  to  be  debated  in  the  city  streets  and  in  all 
places  of  private  or  public  meeting,  and  the  tendency 
of  the  times  was  strongly  in  favor  of  the  Genevan 
doctrine.  This  came  in  a  great  measure  from  the 
apathy  of  the  clergy  who  were  incumbents  of  the 
city  livings,  and  who  seem  to  have  held  preaching  to 
be  no  part  of  their  duty.  Prior  to  the  English 
schism,  preaching  had  naturally  been  limited  to  advis- 
ory exhortations,  for,  there  being  no  opposition  to  the 
established  creed,  controversy  had  no  cause  for  exist- 
ence. After  the  schism  they  were  practically  si- 
lenced by  the  rigid  enforcement  of  the  power  of 
licensing.  Had  they  exerted  themselves,  however, 
during  the  reign  of  James  I.,  and  the  first  years  of 
that  of  Charles  I.,  the  drift  of  affairs  might  have 
been  greatly  checked,  if  not  prevented.  As  the 
rectors  did  not  preach,  others  were  appointed  to  do  so, 
and  these  preachers,  though  Archbishop  Laud  made 
every  effort  to  prevent  it,  gradually  but  surely  took 
the  place  of  the  rectors  themselves.  Again,  as  the 
preacher's  salaries  were  paid  by  the  parishioners,  they 
had  to  be  allowed  their  choice  in  the  matter  of  selec- 
tion. The  preaching  seems  to  have  been  principally 


360  LONDON. 

on  Tuesdays  and  Thursdays,  though  in  the  case  of 
St.  Margaret's  (Lothbury),  where  Alexander  Shepherd 
proposed  preaching  on  the  last-named  days,  the 
parishioners  preferred  Sunday  afternoon  and  Thurs- 
day night.  These  sermons  were  often  attended  by 
violent  demonstrations,  and  disorderly  brawls  not  un- 
frequently  followed  the  last  words. 

The  reign  of  James  I.  was  not  prolific  in  its 
foundations  or  its  monuments,  yet  there  is  one  semi- 
public  institution  which  had  its  inception  during  the 
period,  and  which  merits  especial  mention.  This 
institution  was  called  the  New  Exchange.  It  stood 
on  the  south  side  of  the  Strand,  on  the  site  of  what 
had  been  Durham  House,  facing  what  is  now  Bed- 
ford Street.  Its  frontage  extended  from  Durham 
Street  to  George  Court.  It  can  best  be  described 
as  a  sort  of  arcade,  in  which  were  many  shops  on 
both  sides,  as  well  as  above  and  below,  and  it  became 
a  place  of  great  resort  and  trade  for  the  nobility  and 
the  fashionable  world,  who  congregated  there  in  the 
mornings  to  do  their  shopping.  The  whole  thing  was 
given  a  sort  of  official  status  from  the  fact  that  the 
building,  of  which  the  first  stone  had  been  laid  on 
June  10,  1608,  was  formally  opened  on  April  11, 
1 609,  in  the  presence  of  the  king  and  the  queen — a 
great  honor  in  any  case,  and  more  unusual  then  than 
in  our  days,  as  the  corner-stone  habit  was  not  then  so 
prevalent  among  the  royalty  as  it  is  to-day.  The  king, 
being  asked  to  name  the  new  edifice,  called  it  Britain's 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      361 

Bourse ;  but  the  name  did  not  stick  to  it,  and  it  soon 
became  generally  known  as  the  New  Exchange.  It 
was  a  number  of  years  before  the  place  became  really 
popular,  for  London  was  then  hardly  large  enough 
for  more  than  one  building  of  the  kind,  and  the  older 
merchants  preferred  that  to  which  they  were  already 
accustomed.  The  New  Exchange,  however,  became 
immensely  popular  at  the  Restoration,  for  Covent 
Garden  had  then  become  the  fashionable  locality,  and 
it  was  therefore  more  suitable  and  conveniently  situ- 
ated than  the  one  which  Sir  Thomas  Gresham  had 
founded  on  Coruhill. 

The  year  1611  witnessed  the  foundation,  by  one 
Thomas  Sutton,  of  Camps  Castle,  in  the  county  of 
Cambridge,  philanthropist,  of  the  afterwards  famous 
Charter  House  Hospital.  As  it  will  be  remembered, 
the  Carthusian  priory,  which  had  originally  stood  on 
the  site,  and  from  which  the  name  itself  was  derived, 
had  suffered  dissolution  at  the  hands  of  Henry  VIII., 
and  the  last  prior,  with  four  of  his  brethren,  barbar- 
ously executed.  In  the  division  of  the  spoils  which 
followed  upon  the  dissolution  of  the  religious  houses, 
the  Charter  House  was  granted  by  Henry  VIII.  to 
Sir  Thomas  Audley,  lord  chancellor,  by  whom  it  was 
later  sold  to  Sir  Edward  North,  Baron  North  of 
Kirtling.  Lord  North,  in  turn,  subsequently  parted 
with  it  to  John  Dudley,  Duke  of  Northumberland, 
though,  on  the  latter's  execution  and  attainder,  it 
reverted  by  a  crown  grant  back  to  Lord  North.  It 


362  LONDON. 

will  be  remembered  that  on  the  accession  of  Eliza- 
beth, she  delayed  her  state  entry  into  London  for 
some  days,  until  things  could  be  prepared  for  her, 
and  these  she  spent  as  Lord  North's  guest  at  his 
"  house  at  the  Charter  House,"  where  she  held  a  coun- 
cil each  day.  On  June  7,  1565,  North  again  sold 
the  house,  this  time  to  Thomas  Howard,  Duke  of 
Norfolk,  and  on  the  latter's  execution  and  attainder, 
in  1572,  it  reverted  to  the  crown.  It  was  subse- 
quently granted  by  Elizabeth  to  the  duke's  second 
son,  Thomas,  afterwards  Earl  of  Suffolk,  founder  of 
Audley  End,  in  Essex,  and  he  sold  it  on  May  9, 1611, 
to  Thomas  Sutton  for  the  sum  of  thirteen  thousand 
pounds;  and  on  June  22  following  Sutton  endowed 
it  as  a  charity,  under  the  name  of  the  "  Hospital  of 
King  James."  He  died  the  next  December,  before 
the  alterations  had  been  completed  or  the  place  put 
in  readiness,  and  was  buried  in  the  chapel. 

The  foundation  comprised  both  a  hospital  and  a 
school.  The  hospital  was  to  house  eighty  pensioners, 
who  were  to  be  "  gentlemen  by  descent  and  in  pov- 
erty, soldiers  that  have  borne  arms  by  land  or  sea, 
merchants  decayed  by  piracy  or  shipwreck,"  and 
other  worthy  paupers.  The  only  restrictions  enforced 
were  the  attendance  in  chapel,  the  wearing  of  a  black 
livery  gown,  and  the  compulsion  to  dine  in  com- 
munity in  the  great  hall.  The  school  was  to  accom- 
modate forty  boys,  who  "  are  not  to  be  over  fourteen 
or  under  ten  when  admitted."  It  was  permitted  that 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      363 

the  master  of  the  school  should  also  take  in  other 
pupils  to  the  number  of  sixty,  though  not  exceeding 
it.  From  these,  but  not  from  the  foundation  scholars, 
could  fees  be  taken.  The  number  of  foundation 
scholars  has  been  increased  to  sixty,  while  provision 
has  been  subsequently  made  whereby  no  less  than 
three  hundred  scholars  could  be  taken  who  are  not  on 
the  foundation.  In  1872  the  school,  which  is  one  of 
the  most  famous  in  London,  was  removed  to  a  new 
and  handsome  building,  erected  for  the  purpose  at 
Goldalming,  in  Surrey.  The  Merchant  Tailors,  as  we 
have  seen,  purchased  the  site  and  buildings  on  the 
removal  of  the  Charter  House  School  to  its  new 
quarters,  and  removed  their  own  school,  which  had 
previously  occupied  a  building  near  London  Bridge, 
into  the  more  commodious  and  sanitary  and  now 
vacated  premises  of  its  rival.  The  Charter  House 
has  numbered  many  eminent  men  among  its  masters, 
including  Francis  Beaumont,  cousin  of  the  dramatist ; 
Sir  Robert  Dallington,  the  author  of  "Aphorisms," 
and  others  equally  well  known ;  while  its  scholars 
have  included  Sir  William  Blackstone,  of  "Com- 
mentary "  fame ;  Joseph  Addison  and  Sir  Richard 
Steele ;  John  Wesley,  founder  of  the  Methodists ; 
Lord  Ellenborough,  Archbishop  Sutton,  Bishop 
Monk,  Thomas  Day,  author  of  "  Sanford  and  Mer- 
ton";  Thackeray,  Bishop  Thirhvall,  George  Grote, 
the  eminent  Greek  historian ;  General  Sir  Henry 
Havelock,  Sir  C.  L.  Eastlake,  president  of  the  Royal 


364  LONDON. 

Academy;  and  last,  but  not  least,  Major  General 
Baden- Powell. 

The  accession  of  Charles  I.  was  marked  by  a  reap- 
pearance of  the  plague.  An  accident — the  death  of 
his  elder  brother,  Henry,  Prince  of  Wales — brought 
him  into  the  direct  succession.  Another  accident — 
the  attendance  at  a  court  ball  in  Paris,  while  on  his 
famous  journey  to  Spain — betrothed  him  to  his  wife. 
The  Spanish  marriage  not  having  been  brought  to  a 
satisfactory  issue,  he  espoused  the  Princess  Henrietta 
Maria,  daughter  of  Henry  IV.,  King  of  France,  by 
proxy,  the  June  previous  to  his  father's  death.  On 
his  accession  he  determined  to  complete  his  marriage 
as  soon  as  possible.  Buckingham  was  sent  over  to 
bring  the  princess  to  England,  and  the  formal  nup- 
tials took  place  on  May  27  following. 

If  the  reign  of  Charles  I.  had  been  ushered  in  with 
the  evil  omen  of  the  plague,  such  augur  wras  not  mis- 
leading, for  the  troubles  of  that  unfortunate  monarch 
commenced  almost  simultaneously  with  the  meeting 
of  his  first  Parliament.  The  last  Parliament,  which 
was  dissolved  on  the  death  of  James  I.,  had  brought 
its  sessions  to  a  close  in  a  great  state  of  excitement  at 
the  prospect  of  a  war  with  Spain,  and  Charles  very 
naturally  supposed  that  the  Commons  would  be  unan- 
imous in  granting  him  supplies  adequate  to  conducting 
a  war  which  had  apparently  the  approbation  of  the 
people.  In  this  he  was,  however,  disappointed.  That 
body  was  now  controlled  by  men  of  very  advanced 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      365 

views,  who,  unfavorable  to  the  monarchy,  were  deter- 
mined to  seize  every  opportunity  afforded  by  the 
king's  necessities  to  embarrass  the  crown  by  those 
difficulties  best  calculated  to  deprive  the  royal  office 
of  its  prerogative,  prestige  and  power.  Among  these 
men,  Sir  Edward  Coke,  Sir  Robert  Philips,  Sir  Fran- 
cis Seymour,  Sir  Dudley  Digges,  Sir  John  Elliott, 
Sir  Thomas  Wentworth,  Mr.  Selden  and  Mr.  Pym 
were  the  most  distinguished. 

Their  refusal  of  the  king's  demands  compelled  that 
monarch  to  dissolve  Parliament.  This  occurred  on 
August  12,  1626.  With  a  second  Parliament  sum- 
moned by  him  the  following  February,  Charles  did 
not  meet  with  any  greater  success.  He  found  himself 
compelled  therefore  to  resort  to  other  means  in  order 
to  raise  the  funds  necessary  to  meet  the  expenses  of 
the  war  with  Spain,  and  issued  a  commission  to  levy 
customs,  demanding  at  the  same  time  the  sum  of  one 
hundred  thousand  pounds  from  the  city  of  London. 
The  first  measure,  while  it  partially  succeeded,  caused 
the  greatest  dissatisfaction.  The  second  measure  ab- 
solutely failed,  and  the  city,  following  the  lead  of  the 
Parliament,  refused  the  king's  demand.  The  total 
lack  of  military  distinction  which  was  the  most  con- 
spicuous feature  of  the  Spanish  campaign,  to  which 
may  be  added  the  complications  which  had  arisen 
with  France,  added  greatly  to  the  king's  embarrass- 
ment. Charles  was  himself  reduced  to  summoning 
the  attendance  of  the  third  Parliament;  but,  notwith- 


366  LONDON. 

standing  the  concessions  which  he  promised,  he  again 
failed  to  obtain  an  affirmative  vote  to  his  demands. 
Never  was  sovereign  placed  in  so  difficult  and  un- 
just a  position.  Expected  to  prosecute  a  campaign 
to  its  finish — for  the  war  with  Spain,  once  under- 
taken, could  not  have  been  relinquished  without  loss  of 
national  prestige  and  kingly  honor,  and  those  who,  by 
their  blindness  or  obstinacy,  embarrassed  him  the  most 
would  have  been  the  first  to  cry  out  in  loud  protest 
had  he  done  so — and  yet  denied  the  means  wherewith 
to  insure  the  success  of  the  undertaking,  there  was 
nothing  left  for  him  to  do  but  to  resort  again  to  ex- 
traordinary measures  to  raise  the  required  funds. 
"Forced  loans,  benevolences,  taxes  without  Parlia- 
mentary approval,  martial  law,  and  among  its  con- 
sequences arbitrary  imprisonment  and  fines,"  these 
were  among  the  grievances  of  which  the  Commons 
complained,  and  yet  they  were  the  very  measures 
which  they  themselves  forced  upon  the  king  by  their 
obstinacy  and  refusal  to  meet  the  king's  demands. 
As  if  to  complete  the  sum  of  his  miseries,  the  Com- 
mons now  resolved  themselves  into  a  "  Committee  to 
consider  the  king  and  the  state  of  the  kingdom." 
Pretending  to  no  unusual  privileges,  they  said,  but 
merely  claiming  those  powers  which  were  the  legacy 
of  their  predecessors,  they  finally  drew  up  a  formal 
petition,  which  they  designated  a  "  Petition  of  Rights," 
whereby  it  was  intended  to  imply  that  it  contained 
no  new  claim  or  infringement  of  royal  prerogative, 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUAETS.      367 

but  only  a  corroboration,  as  it  were,  of  those  privi- 
leges obtained  under  the  Magna  Charta. 

Though  the  king  attended  to  their  petition  and 
granted  all  their  demands,  yet  they  persisted  in  refus- 
ing his  requests,  and  proceeded  as  before.  The  situa- 
tion was  now  getting  from  bad  to  worse.  The  assassin- 
ation of  Buckingham,  the  prorogation  of  Parliament, 
the  revival  of  monopolies,  the  translation  of  Laud 
from  the  See  of  London  to  that  of  Canterbury,  and 
the  complications  which  followed;  the  refusal  of  the 
city  to  grant  the  ship  money  demanded  of  it,  the 
abolition  of  the  Episcopacy  and  the  High  Commission 
in  Scotland,  the  summoning  of  the  fourth  or  so-called 
"Short  Parliament,"  and  its  abrupt  dissolution  by 
royal  decree,  all  followed  each  other  in  rapid  succes- 
sion. The  dispute  concerning  ritual  had  by  this  time 
reopened  throughout  Scotland,  and  the  advance  of  the 
so-called  "  Covenanters "  army  into  England  was  in 
itself  enough  to  alarm  the  king.  Charles  therefore 
summoned  a  great  council  of  peers  at  York,  which 
was  convened  in  September,  1640,  and,  foreseeing  that 
they  would  advise  him  to  call  a  Parliament,  announced 
in  his  opening  speech  that  he  intended  doing  so.  That 
Parliament,  called  the  "  Long  Parliament/'  met  on 
November  3  of  the  same  year.  The  impeachment  of 
the  Earl  of  Straffbrd  followed,  and  then  came  the  act 
for  abolishing  "all  images,  altars,  crucifixes,"  on  Janu- 
ary 23,  1641.  Thus  were  all  the  churches  and  ora- 
tories of  London  despoiled  again  of  their  treasures 


368  LONDON. 

of  art  and  piety.  This  was  followed  by  the  so-called 
"  Committee  of  the  Scandalous  Ministers/'  a  self-con- 
stituted body  organized  to  investigate  the  alleged 
"scandalous  conduct  of  the  clergy."  On  May  12 
following,  at  Towrer  Hill,  the  Earl  of  Strafford  suffered 
the  penalty  of  death  for  imaginary  crimes.  He  was  a 
martyr  to  his  loyalty  and  his  devotion  to  his  king, 
and  to  his  hearty  support  of  Laud's  ecclesiastical  prin- 
ciples in  defiance  to  the  Episcopacy. 

The  same  day  that  saw  the  king's  assent  to  the 
execution  of  Straiford  witnessed  his  sanction  to  the 
bill  which  took  from  him  one  of  his  last  remaining 
prerogatives.  This  bill,  whereby  it  was  enacted  that 
the  Parliament  should  not  be  dissolved,  prorogued  or 
adjourned  without  its  own  consent,  was  carried  rap- 
idly through  both  houses.  Another  bill  was  passed 
abolishing  the  Court  of  the  High  Commission  and 
Star  Chamber,  regulating  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
king's  council  and  abridging  its  authority.  The 
hopelessness  of  the  king's  journey  to  Scotland,  fol- 
lowed by  the  insurrection  in  Ireland ;  the  issuing  of 
the  "Remonstrance,"  which  famous  document  was 
addressed  to  the  English  people  by  Parliament  to 
explain  and  attempt  to  justify  its  course,  without  even 
so  much  as  a  pretence  of  its  being  addressed  to  the 
king — all  these  things  gradually  but  surely  led  up  to 
the  civil  war,  the  ominous  roar  of  which  was  already 
audible  in  the  distance.  Open  brawls  between  "  Cava- 
liers "  and  "  Roundheads  "  were  now  no  unfrequent 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      369 

sight  in  the  streets  of  London,  and  the  feeling  against 
the  Episcopacy  ran  so  high  in  certain  quarters  that  the 
bishops  were  prevented  from  attending  Parliament, 
owing  to  the  insults  to  which  they  were  exposed. 

The  royal  prestige  was  already  so  largely  impaired 
that  the  king  was  powerless  in  the  matter,  and  the 
failure  of  the  king's  visit  to  Parliament  to  seize  the 
persons  of  Lord  Kimbolton,  Pym,  Hampden,  Hazel- 
rig,  Holies  and  Strode  was  additionally  instrumental 
in  undermining  the  royal  authority,  and  the  visit 
itself  was  profoundly  resented  by  the  Commons  as  a 
breach  of  their  privileges ;  nor  did  the  king's  visit  to 
the  Guildhall  on  January  5,  the  day  following,  to  de- 
mand that,  if  the  members  whom  he  sought  took 
refuge  in  the  city,  the  mayor  and  corporation  should 
hand  them  over  to  his  royal  justice,  in  any  way 
mend  matters,  while  it  considerably  lessened  the  royal 
dignity.  The  House  met  again  on  January  11,  but, 
after  confirming  the  votes  of  the  committee,  immedi- 
ately adjourned,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  exposed  to 
the  greatest  perils  from  the  violence  of  its  enemies. 
On  the  day  appointed  Pym,  Hampden,  Hazelrig  and 
the  other  accused  members  were  conducted  by  water 
to  the  House.  The  river  presented  a  remarkable 
spectacle.  It  was  covered  with  ships  and  a  quantity 
of  small  craft,  and  on  landing  the  party  were  received 
by  a  mounted  escort,  that  had  come  from  Bucking- 
hamshire to  testify  their  devotion  to  Hampden. 

The  king,  apprehensive  of  danger,  had  retired  to 
VOL.  I.— 24 


370  LONDON. 

Hampton  Court  the  day  previous,  and  to  Windsor  on 
January  12.  His  absence  from  London  only  tended, 
however,  to  aggravate  matters.  Petitions  of  the  most 
seditious  character  were  presented  to  Parliament, 
signed  by  merchants  and  other  tradesmen.  To  in- 
crease the  general  alarm,  the  Commons,  on  the  day 
after  they  had  reassembled,  January  12,  reported  to 
the  Lords  a  pretended  design  to  kill  the  Earl  of 
Essex  and  four  other  peers;  and  two  days  later  re- 
solved that  "all  who  had  given  the  king  evil  counsel" 
— and  this  included  all  the  king's  advisers,  legal  or 
otherwise,  who  had  happened  to  incur  the  displeasure 
of  the  Commons,  and  had  thereby  been  the  means  of 
maintaining  divisions  between  the  king  and  Parlia- 
ment— should  be  adjudged  enemies  of  the  State,  and 
therefore  guilty  of  high  treason.  In  vain  did  the 
unfortunate  Charles  endeavor  to  allay  the  agitation, 
which,  if  not  assumed,  was  certainly  out  of  all  pro- 
portion to  the  events.  But  all  the  king's  concessions 
and  assurances  were  met  by  the  Commons  with  inso- 
lence and  new  demands.  They  did  not  cease  tor- 
menting the  miserable  monarch  until  he  had  conferred 
the  governorship  of  the  Tower  on  one  of  their  own 
creatures,  Sir  John  Conyers,  in  whom  alone  they 
claimed  that  they  could  repose  confidence;  and,  fail- 
ing in  their  endeavor  to  give  even  greater  alarm  to 
the  people  by  a  proclamation  inciting  them  to  a  pos- 
ture of  defence  against  the  pretended  conspiracies  of 
"  papists  and  other  ill-affected  persons " — a  motion 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      371 

which  the  peers  would  not  countenance  or  sanction — 
they  determined  to  accomplish  their  ends  by  seizing 
at  once  the  power  of  the  sword,  by  means  of  the 
establishment  of  a  militia,  which  would  have  as  its 
officers  creatures  of  their  own.  A  bill  was  introduced 
to  this  effect,  and  passed  both  houses,  which  also  pur- 
posed to  restore  the  lieutenants  of  counties  and  their 
deputies  to  the  powers  from  which  they  had  been 
deprived,  while  for  their  conduct  they  were  to  be 
accountable  in  the  future,  not  to  the  king,  but  only  to 
the  Parliament.  • 

When  this  measure  was  presented  to  the  king  for 
his  approval  and  signature,  he  was  at  Dover,  attend- 
ing the  queen  and  his  daughter  Mary,  Princess  of 
Orange,  on  their  embarkation  for  Holland.  Being 
disposed  to  evade,  rather  than  actively  oppose  the  bill, 
the  king  travelled  first  to  York,  proceeding  thence  by 
slow  stages  to  London.  Everywhere  Charles  met 
with  the  most  loyal  welcome,  the  clergy,  nobility  and 
gentry  hastening  to  express,  either  in  person  or  by 
letter,  their  devotion  and  affection  to  his  royal  person. 
Encouraged  by  such  support,  the  king  recovered  a 
certain  degree  of  assurance,  and  issued  proclamations 
complaining  of  the  manifest  usurpation  by  the  Parlia- 
ment of  his  royal  prerogative,  and  the  county  of 
York  levied  a  guard  of  six  hundred  men  for  his 
protection.  This  was  immediately  construed  by  the 
Commons  as  a  breach  of  trust,  and  the  forces  which 
had  been  everywhere  raised  on  pretence  of  service  in 


372  LONDON. 

Ireland  were  now  openly  enlisted  against  the  king,  in 
whose  name  they  had  been  raised.  Such  was  the 
general  excitement  that  on  all  sides  quantities  of  plate 
and  other  valuables  were  put  at  the  disposal  of  the 
Parliament  as  a  means  of  raising  the  funds  necessary 
to  the  maintenance  of  such  an  armament,  and  in 
London  alone  four  thousand  men  were  enlisted  in  one 
day.  The  queen,  on  the  other  hand,  had,  by  the  dis- 
posal of  the  crown  jewels  in  Holland,  been  able  to 
purchase  a  cargo  of  arms  and  ammunition,  a  part  of 
which  reached  the  king  after  many  perils.  Parlia- 
ment now  placed  before  the  king  the  conditions  under 
which  it  was  willing  to  come  to  an  agreement ;  but  so 
ignominious  were  these  that  Charles  felt  that  war  on 
any  terms  was  preferable  to  such  a  peace,  so  igno- 
minious, and  accordingly  raised  his  standard  at  Not- 
tingham on  August  22,  1642,  and  the  civil  war  thus 
began  in  earnest. 

The  king  and  the  Parliament  being  now  in  open 
conflict,  the  people  of  England  were  driven  to  take 
sides  with  either  the  one  or  the  other,  and  most  violent 
animosities  and  bitter  feuds  were  thereby  engendered. 
The  Episcopacy,  the  clergy,  the  nobility,  and  at  least 
the  greater  portion  of  the  gentry  very  naturally  sided 
with  the  monarch,  from  whom  they  themselves  derived 
their  lustre,  while  London,  the  followers  of  the  Pres- 
byterian doctrine,  the  great  corporations  and  the 
greater  part  of  the  citizens  took  the  side  of  Parlia- 
ment and  adopted  with  zeal  those  democratic  principles 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUAETS.      373 

on  which  the  pretensions  of  that  body  were  founded. 
It  is  hardly  within  the  limits  of  this  present  work  to 
enter  in  any  detailed  manner  into  the  lamentable 
events  which  followed.  They  are,  besides  which,  too 
well  known  to  require  any  but  the  briefest  recapitula- 
tion. The  disasters  of  Edgehill,  the  momentary 
success  of  Brentford,  when  Charles,  being  more  fortu- 
nate, was  able  to  take  prisoners  some  hundred  of 
Essex's  men ;  the  victory  of  Hopton  Heath  (March 
19,  1643),  counterbalanced  by  the  taking  of  Reading 
by  Essex  (April  27) ;  the  great  triumphs  of  New- 
castle, in  uniting  Northumberland,  Cumberland,  West- 
moreland and  the  bishopric  of  Durham  under  the 
king's  standard,  and  his  taking  of  York,  while  the 
counties  of  Essex,  Suffolk,  Norfolk,  Lincoln,  Cam- 
bridge, Huntingdon  and  Hertford  had  been  combined 
by  Lord  Grey  of  Wark  against  the  king ;  the  success 
achieved  by  Sir  Ralph  Hopton,  in  securing  Cornwall 
for  the  monarch,  while  Sir  William  Waller  had  united 
Winchester,  Chichester,  Hereford  and  Tewkesbury 
for  the  Parliament,  succeeded  in  alternately  raising 
and  crushing  the  hopes  of  the  Royalists,  while  the 
success  of  royal  arms  in  the  west,  where  the  Marquis 
of  Hertford  succeeded  in  reducing  Devonshire,  and 
the  defeat  of  Waller  at  Devizes  (July  13,  1643);  the 
surrender  of  Bristol  to  Prince  Rupert  (July  27)  and 
the  investment  of  Gloucester  (August  10)  had  the 
effect  of  almost  reducing  Parliament  to  submission. 
In  London  the  friction  between  the  two  factions 


374  LONDON. 

foreboded  dangerous  developments.  At  the  beginning 
of  the  summer  a  design  had  been  formed  for  disarm- 
ing the  London  militia  and  compelling  Parliament  to 
accept  the  king's  conditions.  It  was  unfortunate  for 
the  royal  cause  that  the  design  was  discovered,  as 
discovery  resulted  in  frustration,  and  the  principals  of 
the  plot,  who  included  Edmund  Waller,  the  poet,  and 
Tompkins,  his  brother-in-law,  and  Chaloner,  his  friend, 
were  seized  and  the  last  two  executed  on  gibbets 
before  their  own  doors,  Waller  escaping  by  an  abject 
submission  and  the  payment  of  ten  thousand  pounds. 
The  news  having  reached  London  as  to  the  success 
of  the  royal  armies  in  besieging  Gloucester,  Parlia- 
ment seemed  almost  disposed  to  consent  to  a  peace  on 
conditions  most  favorable  to  the  king ;  but  the  Puri- 
tans redoubled  their  energies  and  persuaded  the 
Parliament  to  make  every  preparation  for  the  relief 
of  the  besieged  city.  This  was  done,  and  Essex 
started  with  the  army  that  had  been  furnished  him 
for  the  scene  of  the  conflict.  What  followed  is  well 
known  to  all.  The  battle  of  Newbuiy  (September 
10,  1643),  with  its  attendant  horrors  and  its  undeter- 
mined end  ;  the  renewal  of  hostilities  in  the  spring, 
the  success  of  the  Earl  of  Brentford  near  Banbury 
(June  29,  1644),  the  fatal  termination  of  the  battle 
of  Marston  Moor,  in  which  Newcastle's  regiments 
were  so  disastrously  routed  by  the  Cromwellian  army 
(July  2, 1644) ;  the  second  battle  of  Newbury  (October 
27,  1644),  in  which  the  Earl  of  Manchester  com- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUAKTS.      375 

manded  the  Parliamentary  forces — all  these  left  the 
affairs  of  the  nation  in  still  the  same  undecided 
state. 

But  the  Independents  were,  though  in  the  minority, 
now  to  achieve  a  signal  triumph  in  the  passing  of 
an  act  prohibiting  members  of  either  house  from 
holding  a  civil  or  military  appointment.  This  meas- 
ure had  practically  the  effect  of  barring  all  peers 
from  being  officers ;  but  the  command  of  the  Parlia- 
mentary armies  having  been  conferred  on  Sir  Thomas 
Fairfax,  the  latter  represented  the  services  of  Crom- 
well as  indispensable,  so  that,  notwithstanding  the 
act  and  the  fact  that  he  occupied  a  seat  in  the  lower 
house,  his  commission  was  renewed  for  a  short  period 
of  time,  and  ultimately  for  the  whole  campaign,  so 
that,  though  the  supreme  authority  was  nominally 
vested  in  Fairfax,  it  in  reality  devolved  upon  Crom- 
well. The  conference  between  the  king  and  the 
Parliament,  which  was  opened  at  Uxbridge  on  Jan- 
uary 30,  1645,  resulted  in  nought  and  was  fatal  to 
the  royal  dignity,  which  should  nevor  have  descended 
to  a  parley  with  a  Parliament  in  open  rebellion  against 
the  royal  authority.  Meanwhile  the  unfortunate 
Laud  had  been  brought  to  the  scaffold,  and  Tower 
Hill  witnessed  the  execution  of  that  prelate  on  Jan- 
uary 10,  1645. 

The  campaign  of  1645  had  opened  with  some 
advantage  to  the  Royalists,  but  the  terrible  disasters 
to  the  royal  army  at  Naseby,  followed  by  Prince 


376  LONDON. 

Rupert's  capitulation  of  Bristol,  seemed  like  a  death 
knell  to  the  monarchy.  The  king's  affairs  seemed 
now  to  be  falling  to  pieces  in  every  direction.  The 
failure  of  the  king's  armies  to  relieve  Chester  and 
his  subsequent  flight  to  Newark  and  Oxford,  where 
the  royal  army  went  into  winter  quarters,  and  more 
especially  the  great  weakness  which  he  showed  in 
seeking  passports  from  the  Parliament  to  sue  for 
peace,  were  all  sure  steps  in  his  downfall.  His  flight 
from  Oxford,  where  he  had  been  during  the  winter  of 
1646,  to  the  Scottish  camp,  where  he  arrived  May  5 
of  the  same  year,  and  the  delivery  of  his  person  to 
the  commissioners  of  the  Parliament  (January  30, 
1647),  who  conducted  the  illustrious  prisoner  to 
Holmby,  were  the  next  steps  in  the  royal  tragedy. 
But  Charles  was  not  to  remain  long  at  the  latter 
place,  for  June  4  of  that  spring  was  the  eventful  day 
on  which  Joyce  conducted  the  king  to  the  now  dis- 
affected Parliamentary  army  at  Triplow  Heath,  near 
Cambridge.  This  turn  of  affairs  took  the  Parliament 
by  surprise,  and,  finding  that  many  of  the  disaffected 
officers  were  Cromwell's  men,  they  determined  to 
enter  an  accusation  against  him,  and  that  he  should  be 
sent  to  the  Towrer.  He,  however,  nipped  their  plan 
in  the  bud  by  joining  the  army  and  leading  it  towards 
London,  and  thus  the  capital  became  once  more  the 
scene  of  the  conflict. 

London  had  retained  a  strong  attachment  to  Pres- 
byterianism,  and  the  Parliament  felt  that    it    could 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUAKTS.      377 

entirely  rely  on  its  militia.  It  was  thought  better, 
however,  to  submit ;  but  the  army  party,  having  suc- 
ceeded in  obtaining  the  arrest  of  eleven  of  the  chief 
Presbyterian  elders,  did  not  think  it  well  to  force  their 
way  into  the  city,  and  so  proceeded  to  Reading,  taking 
the  king  with  them.  But  so  strange  were  the  vacil- 
lating methods  of  those  turbulent  days,  that  the  army, 
which  only  a  few  days  before  had  been  in  direct 
antagonism  with  the  Parliament,  now  became  prac- 
tically reconciled  with  that  body  and  indeed  its 
defender,  and  this  was  brought  about  in  the  most 
singular  manner  and  by  the  very  means  which  it 
would  have  been  supposed  would  have  prevented 
such  a  result  The  Parliament  had  some  time  before, 
at  the  instance  of  and  coerced  by  the  army,  passed  a 
bill  by  which  it  was  enacted  that  the  militia  of 
London  should  be  changed,  the  Presbyterian  commis- 
sioners displaced,  and  the  command  restored  to  those 
who  had  previously  exercised  it.  The  Londoners, 
however,  opposed  the  bill  and,  proceeding  to  Parlia- 
ment, demanded  of  it  that  it  should  reverse  the  vote 
just  taken  and  coerced  it  into  revoking  the  measure. 
The  army,  which  had  used  much  the  same  method  of 
threat  and  violence  to  compel  the  enactment  of  the 
measure,  now  turned  the  tables  and,  expressing  the 
opinion  that  the  act  of  the  Londoners  was  an  infringe- 
ment on  the  rights  of  the  Parliament,  took  up  the 
defence  of  the  latter  as  against  the  people,  so  that  the 
king  found  himself  in  the  extraordinary  position  of 


378  LONDON. 

being  nominally  the  head  of  an  army  which  had  one  of 
his  most  determined  enemies  as  its  commander,  and 
which  was  defending  and  protecting  that  very  body 
against  which  he  himself  had  only  a  few  months 
before  been  waging  the  fiercest  war. 

Without  experiencing  the  least  resistance,  the  army 
entered  the  city  and  proceeded  at  once  to  Westminster. 
Seven  peers  were  impeached,  eleven  members  were 
expelled,  the  lord  mayor,  one  sheriff  and  three  alder- 
men sent  to  the  Tower,  several  citizens  and  officers  of 
the  militia  committed  to  prison,  every  deed  of  the 
Parliament  from  the  beginning  of  the  tumult  annulled, 
and  a  solemn  day  of  thanksgiving  appointed  for  the 
restoration  of  Parliamentary  liberty.  The  king  had 
come  with  the  army  as  far  as  Hampton  Court,  where 
he  was  living,  to  all  outward  appearance,  with  that 
dignity  which  befitted  his  rank,  but  he  did  not  remain 
there  long.  Persuaded  that  his  life  was  in  imminent 
danger,  he  secretly  left  Hampton  Court  on  the  night 
of  November  12,  1647 — the  same  year  which  had 
seen  his  arrival  there  in  August — and  escaped  to  the 
Isle  of  Wight,  where  he  sought  the  protection  of 
Hammond,  governor  of  the  island,  and  was  escorted 
by  him  to  Carisbrooke  Castle.  Meanwhile  Cromwell, 
being  now  entirely  master  of  the  Parliament  and  of 
the  army,  applied  himself  seriously  to  quell  the  dis- 
orders which  existed  throughout  the  kingdom ;  and, 
with  this  purpose  in  view,  called  a  council  of  the  chief 
officers  of  the  armv  at  Windsor  to  determine  on  the 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.  379 

settlement  of  the  nation  and  the  future  disposition  of 
the  king's  person.  It  was  at  this  conference  that  first 
was  made  the  daring  proposition  of  bringing  the  king 
to  trial,  and  it  was  determined  to  send  or  receive  no 
more  petitions  to  or  from  the  king. 

One  more  struggle  remained  to  be  made  in  the 
king's  behalf,  and  this  was  to  end  in  failure.  Dis- 
content among  the  Scotch,  because  of  the  disregard  of 
the  Covenant  by  the  Parliament,  resulted  in  the  de- 
termination of  the  Duke  of  Hamilton  to  defend  the 
king,  and,  having  obtained  from  the  Scottish  Parlia- 
ment a  vote  of  forty  thousand  men,  he  entered  into 
communication  with  the  English  Royalists,  Sir  Mar- 
maduke  Langdale  and  Sir  Philip  Musgrave,  who 
had  succeeded  in  raising  considerable  forces  in  the 
north  of  England.  The  English  Royalists  having, 
however,  declined  to  accept  the  Covenant,  Hamilton 
found  it  impossible  to  unite  his  forces  with  theirs,  and 
thus  the  Royalists  were  divided  among  themselves. 
Had  it  not  been  for  this,  they  might  yet  have  pre- 
vailed. The  defeat  of  Hamilton  by  the  Cromwellian 
army,  and  his  final  surrender  at  Uttoxeter,  the  cap- 
ture of  Colchester  by  Fairfax  (August  27,  1648),  and 
the  brutal  execution  of  Sir  Charles  Lucas  and  Sir 
George  Lisle,  ended  the  last  of  the  struggles  of  the 
unfortunate  monarch. 

The  Commons  now  resolved  to  proceed  capitally 
against  the  king,  and  on  January  2,  1649,  sent  up 
their  vote  to  the  Lords,  declaring  it  treason  for  a  king 


380  LONDON. 

to  thus  levy  war  upon  the  Parliament,  and  appointed 
a  High  Court  of  Justice  to  try  Charles  for  this  newly- 
invented  crime.  This  was  rejected  by  the  peers,  who 
assembled  to  the  number  of  twelve,  without  a  dissent- 
ing vote.  The  Commons,  however,  were  not  to  be 
checked  by  so  slight  an  obstacle.  They  declared  that 
the  people  of  England  were  the  origin  of  all  just 
power,  and  that  the  Commons,  as  their  representatives, 
were  the  supreme  authority  of  the  nation,  so  that 
whatever  they  enacted  became  law  without  the  con- 
sent of  either  the  Lords  or  the  sovereign;  and  on 
January  6  following  the  ordinance  for  the  trial  of  the 
king  was  again  read  and  unanimously  assented  to. 
The  king  had  been  brought  to  Windsor  on  December 
23,  and  was  then  at  the  castle.  He  was  now  brought 
to  Westminster,  and  London  became  the  scene  of  the 
most  famous  and  illustrious  trial  in  the  history  of 
English  justice,  and  Westminster  Hall  that  of  the 
most  eminent  gathering  that  ever  was  assembled  at 
an  English  court  of  law.  No  words  can  fittingly 
describe  this  tremendous  event.  Three  times  was 
the  king  brought  before  the  so-called  High  Court 
of  Justice,  but  he  declined  defence  with  very  proper 
dignity,  not  recognizing  the  jurisdiction  of  that  body. 
Sentence,  a  foregone  conclusion,  was  pronounced  on  Sat- 
urday, January  27,  and  three  days  later  (Tuesday,  Jan- 
uary 30),  at  two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  the  unfortu- 
nate monarch  met  his  death  on  the  scaffold  which  had 
been  erected  in  front  of  the  banqueting  hall  at  Whitehall. 


Windsor  Castle  from  the  Thames 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      381 

Whatever  may  be  thought  of  the  apparent  weak- 
nesses of  his  character,  it  is  unanimously  agreed  that 
the  king's  behavior  during  the  closing  scenes  of  his 
life  did  the  highest  honor  to  his  memory,  and  that 
he  never  forgot  his  part  as  a  Christian,  a  prince 
and  a  soldier.  As  the  head  of  the  illustrious  victim 
fell  under  the  axe  a  deep  groan  burst  from  the  assem- 
bled multitude.  The  crowd  tried  to  burst  its  bounds, 
and  many  succeeded  in  pushing  through  the  soldiers 
that  they  might  dip  their  handkerchiefs  in  the  blood 
of  the  illustrious  prince  who  had  rendered  up  his 
life. 

The  most  terrible  confusion  now  followed,  and  the 
whole  city  and  all  its  citizens  seemed  swayed  by  the 
most  tremendous  emotion.  But  the  Commons  did  not 
relax  their  efforts.  A  few  days  later  they  passed  an 
act  abolishing  the  monarchy  and  the  Lords  as  useless 
and  antiquated  incumbrances,  and  the  form  of  all 
public  business  changed,  from  being  in  the  king's 
name  to  being  in  that  of  the  Parliament.  But  una- 
nimity of  opinion  did  not  obtain  even  in  that  body, 
for  the  nobles  remained  faithful  to  the  monarchical 
idea,  and  recognized  in  the  exiled  Prince  of  Wales  their 
rightful  sovereign  ;  while  others  inveighed  against  a 
hireling  priesthood,  and  sought  the  complete  dissolu- 
tion of  the  constitution,  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  the 
better,  they  argued,  to  facilitate  the  dominion  of  Christ, 
whose  second  coming  they  expected. 

London  was  now  left  without  a  court.     Cromwell 


382  LONDON. 

himself,  the  Lord  Protector,  was  first  in  Ireland,  then 
in  Scotland,  conducting  military  operations  for  the 
subjection  of  those  countries,  which  had,  while  seeking 
themselves  every  possible  freedom  and  liberty,  de- 
termined to  retain  the  king  and  the  monarchy  as  a 
part  of  state  pageantry.  Ireland  and  Scotland  hav- 
ing been  properly  reduced,  the  Dutch  were  next  to  feel 
the  power  of  British  arms.  Meanwhile  London  was 
the  scene  of  many  widely  differing  dramas.  On 
April  20,  1653,  this  famous  city  witnessed  the  most 
extraordinary  usurpation  of  authority  which  the  his- 
tory of  England  has  known.  Seeing  that  the  Parlia- 
ment was  now  jealous  of  his  power,  prestige  and 
privileges,  Cromwell  had  determined  by  one  well- 
aimed  blow  to  reduce  it  to  complete  subjection  to  his 
authority,  and  for  this  purpose  had  summoned  a 
general  council  of  officers,  which  had  met  on  the  pre- 
ceding August  13,  and  had  voted  a  remonstrance  to 
Parliament.  The  legislative  body  having  taken  this 
measure,  however,  in  very  bad  part,  and  determined, 
instead  of  dissolving,  to  fill  the  house  by  new  elections, 
it  was  then  that  Cromwell  determined  to  dissolve  it  by 
force.  He  accordingly  proceeded  there  with  a  body 
of  three  hundred  soldiers,  and  entered  the  building. 
The  scene  which  followed  is  almost  indescribable  for 
its  audacity  and  nerve.  Commencing  by  addressing 
Parliament  with  forced  calmness,  he  ended  by  loading 
it  with  opprobrium  and  the  vilest  reproaches  for  tyr- 
anny, robbery  and  oppression.  Then  directing  one 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      383 

soldier  to  seize  the  mace,  he  commanded  the  others  to 
clear  the  hall,  which  they  did  without  heeding  the  re- 
monstrances of  the  legislators,  whom  they  merely 
hustled  out.  This  being  done,  the  Lord  Protector 
went  out  last,  locking  the  door  after  him,  and  departed 
for  his  lodgings  at  "Whitehall. 

This  was  followed  by  the  establishment  by  Crom- 
well of  the  so-called  "  Little  Parliament,"  of  which 
Praise-God  Barebones  was  the  shining  light ;  but  its 
duties  did  not  last  long,  and,  after  about  six  months, 
it  resigned  its  "  powers  "  in  favor  of  Cromwell  him- 
self, from  whom  it  had  itself  received  them,  and  thus 
Cromwell  became  absolute  master  of  the  kingdom, 
with  the  sole  condition  that  he  should  every  three 
years  summon  a  Parliament,  the  function  of  which 
was  less  to  enact  laws  than  perhaps  to  ratify  those 
which  he  had  promulgated.  The  scenes  which  fol- 
lowed the  convening  of  the  first  of  these  assemblies 
are  too  well  known  to  require  comment — scenes  which 
led  to  the  dissolution  by  Cromwell  of  that  very  body 
which  he  himself  had  brought  together.  But  Crom- 
well did  not  confine  his  oppressions  to  the  Parliament 
of  the  nation.  London  was  also  made  to  feel  the 
usurper's  hand.  It  was  a  rude  shock,  indeed,  for  the 
hitherto  privileged  city  to  have  a  couple  of  regiments 
ordered  to  make  a  descent  upon  it,  and  secure  all  and 
any  moneys  that  they  could  find,  no  less  than  twenty 
thousand  pounds  being  secured  on  one  occasion  by  the 
very  simple  method  of  seizing  the  coffers  of  the  city 


384  LONDON. 

companies.  Neither  Parliament  nor  citizens  had  any 
right  to  complain.  They  had  by  their  conduct  called 
a  monster  to  life,  and  there  was  nothing  to  do  but  to 
abide  by  the  consequences.  The  events  of  his  reign, 
including  the  Tunisian  incident  and  the  rape  of  Ja- 
maica, for  reign  it  really  was,  do  not  concern  the  his- 
tory of  the  capital  city.  London,  or  to  be  technically 
accurate,  Westminster  was,  however,  to  be  the  scene 
of  his  greatest  triumph ;  for  here,  in  the  same  hall 
which  had  witnessed  the  proceedings  against  his  un- 
fortunate predecessor,  Cromwell,  who  had  declined 
the  crown  offered  by  a  slavish  Parliament  in  May, 
1657,  was,  on  June  26  following,  pompously  rein- 
stalled in  the  exercise  of  his  protectorship,  "  seated  in 
purple  and  ermine  at  the  upper  end  of  the  hall,  with 
a  golden  sceptre  in  the  right  hand,  a  golden  Bible  in 
the  other."  He  did  not  long,  however,  enjoy  his  high 
honors,  for  London,  which  had  in  June,  1657,  wit- 
nessed his  triumph,  fifteen  months  later  witnessed  his 
demise  (September  3,  1658). 

The  events  which  followed,  the  recognition  of  Rich- 
ard, Cromwell's  son,  as  his  successor,  his  subsequent 
deposition,  the  investing  of  the  Committee  of  Safety 
with  sovereign  authority,  the  efforts  of  Monk,  at  the 
time  in  command  in  Scotland,  in  the  king's  favor,  all 
these  followed  each  other  in  rapid  succession.  After 
such  weary  unrest  and  confusion,  the  arrival  of  Monk 
and  his  army  was  hailed  by  the  city  with  satisfaction, 
and  when  on  the  assembling  of  the  new  Parliament, 


LONDON  UNDEK  THE  STUARTS.      385 

April  25,  1660 — which,  from  its  not  being  regularly 
summoned,  was  called  the  "Convention  Parliament" — 
a  motion  was  made  by  King,  seconded  by  Finch,  to 
restore  the  king,  it  was  greeted  with  the  loudest  ac- 
clamations and  enthusiasm,  and  thirteen  days  later, 
May  6,  the  palace  yard  at  Whitehall  witnessed  the 
solemn  proclamation  whereby  Charles  II.  ascended 
the  throne  of  his  ancestors. 

During  all  this  time  London  itself  had  undergone  a 
number  of  important  changes.  Like  the  reign  of 
James  I.,  that  of  Charles  I.  cannot  be  said  to  be  par- 
ticularly distinguished  for  its  foundations  or  monu- 
ments. The  terrible  political  struggles,  and  the  tre- 
mendous emotions  by  which  the  whole  nation  and  the 
city  were  swayed,  did  not  admit  of  the  very  free  de- 
velopment of  beneficent  inclination  or  commercial 
initiative.  The  king  had  found  time  and  occasion, 
however,  in  the  earlier  years  of  his  reign  to  grant  a 
number  of  charters  to  city  companies.  Thus  the  Up- 
holders were  the  first  to  successfully  solicit  a  charter 
from  Charles,  which  they  obtained  in  1626.  The 
Playing  Card  Makers  obtained  theirs  three  years  later, 
in  1629,  and  the  Clockmakers  in  1631.  The  Glaz- 
iers received  a  charter  in  1637,  and  the  Glovers  and 
Gunmakers  obtained  one  in  1638. 

A  charter  of  incorporation   was   also  granted   by 

Charles  I.  to  Sion  College.     This  institution,  though 

founded  during  the  reign  of  his  predecessor,  in  1623, 

by  Dr.  Thomas  White,  the  vicar  of  St.  Dunstan  in 

VOL.  I.— 25 


386  LONDON. 

the  West,  as  a  "college  and  almshouse,"  did  not  ob- 
tain royal  recognition  until  the  granting  of  the  above 
mentioned  charter  in  1630.  The  "college,"  as  it  was 
called,  consisted  of  all  the  incumbents  of  the  city  of 
London  and  its  suburbs,  and  by  prescription  the 
suburbs  are  taken  to  include  not  only  all  the  parishes 
which  were  actually  contiguous  to  the  city  walls  at 
the  time  of  the  foundation,  but  also  all  those  which 
the  exigency  of  later  times  have  caused  to  be  carved 
out  of  the  same.  It  was  intended  and  has  since  re- 
mained a  kind  of  clerical  club,  the  governing  body 
of  which  consists  of  a  president,  two  deans  and  four 
assistants,  who  are  elected  annually  on  the  third  Tues- 
day after  Easter  Tuesday.  The  library  of  the  college, 
which  is  coeval  with  its  foundation,  was  the  gift  of 
Dr.  John  Simpson,  rector  of  St.  Olave,  Hart  Street, 
one  of  the  executors  under  the  founder's  will,  and  has 
always  been  one  of  the  chief  glories  of  the  college.  The 
original  buildings  at  London  wall,  between  Alderman- 
bury  on  the  east  and  Philip  Lane  on  the  west — the 
former  site  of  the  suppressed  Elsyng  Hospital — suffered 
severely  from  the  great  fire  of  1666.  The  college 
library  and  the  almshouse,  which  was  intended  to 
shelter  ten  old  men  and  ten  old  women,  continued  on 
the  same  site  until  1884,  when,  with  a  view  of  moving 
the  college  and  its  valuable  library  to  a  more  spacious 
and  suitable  building,  an  act  of  Parliament  was  ob- 
tained which  sanctioned  the  removal  of  the  institution 
to  its  present  site  on  Victoria  Embankment.  The 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUAKTS.  387 

work  on  the  new  building  was  commenced  almost  im- 
mediately, and  it  was  formally  opened  by  the  Prince 
and  Princess  of  Wales  on  December  15,  1886.  The 
same  act  authorized  the  abolition  of  the  almshouse, 
and  directed  that  the  alms-folk  be  granted  annuities 
instead  of  living  in  community.  The  library  was  at 
first  dependent  for  the  renewal  of  its  supply  of  books 
entirely  upon  voluntary  contributions  and  donations, 
but  the  copyright  act,  Anne  6,  c.  7,  provided  that  it 
should  receive  one  volume  of  all  the  books  registered 
at  Stationers'  Hall.  This  privilege  was  taken  from 
the  library  in  1836,  by  the  6  and  7  William  IV.,  but 
a  monetary  compensation  for  the  purchase  of  new 
books  granted  to  it  instead.  The  library  and  reading 
room  connected  with  it  is  open  to  all  fellows  of  the 
college  or  licensed  curates  of  the  metropolis,  who,  for 
an  annual  fee  of  ten  shillings  and  sixpence,  can  acquire 
the  privilege  of  borrowing  from  it  for  home  reading. 
Incumbents  not  being  fellows  pay  an  annual  guinea 
for  the  same  privileges.  The  library  is  also  open  to 
the  general  public  for  the  purpose  of  consultation  dur- 
ing the  hours  from  ten  until  four  o'clock. 

But  London  owes  one  thing  to  the  early  Stuarts 
which  has  not  yet  been  mentioned,  for  it  was  James 
I.  who,  in  1618,  preserved,  to  his  credit  be  it  said,  the 
opening  of  Lincoln's  Inn  Fields  from  the  all- 
encroaching  builder.  As  early  as  1613  the  Lords  of 
the  Privy  Council  wrote  to  the  County  Justices  to 
restrain  certain  building  operations  in  Lincoln's  Inn 


388  LONDON. 

Fields.  James  I.,  however,  determined  that  the  fields 
should  be  "  laid  out  in  walks  like  Moorfields,"  and 
by  a  patent,  dated  November  16,  1618,  he  appointed 
Francis  Bacon  and  others  as  a  commission  to  see  that 
the  work  was  properly  carried  on.  The  commis- 
sioners in  their  turn  appointed  Inigo  Jones,  the  then 
rising  architect,  to  attend  to  the  matter.  But  the 
labors  of  Inigo  Jones  were  not  to  be  confined  to  gar- 
dening, for  he  next  received  an  order  from  James 
himself  to  commence  the  reconstruction  of  Whitehall, 
which  had  been  seriously  damaged  in  the  fire  of  1615; 
but  at  the  outbreak  of  the  civil  war  the  banqueting 
hall  alone  had  been  completed.  Jones,  who  had  now 
risen  high  in  favor,  was  also  employed  by  George 
Villiers,  afterwards  Duke  of  Buckingham,  and  favor- 
ite of  James  I.,  to  build  for  him  a  splendid  mansion, 
which  he  called  York  House,  and  of  which  the  Water- 
gate, near  Charing  Cross,  is  the  remaining  relic. 

Nor  was  Lincoln's  Inn  Fields  the  only  square  of 
which  Inigo  Jones  was  the  architect.  Covent  Garden, 
so  called  from  its  having  originally  formed  part  of 
the  garden  of  the  abbey  of  Westminster,  was  also 
his  work.  The  square  was  formed  about  1631,  at  the 
expense  of  Francis,  Earl  of  Bedford.  The  arcade 
ran  along  the  whole  of  the  north  and  east  sides.  The 
west  side  was  formed  by  the  church  of  St.  Paul,  of 
which  Inigo  Jones  was  also  the  architect,  while  the 
south  side  was  formed  by  the  garden  wall  of  Bedford 
House,  which  faced  the  Strand.  Jones  also  com- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      389 

menced  the  restoration  of  St.  Paul's  Cathedral,  which 
had  become  greatly  out  of  repair  during  the  preceding 
reigns.  He  never  got  farther  than  the  portico,  how- 
ever, for  the  civil  war  stopped  the  work,  and  Jones 
died  before  the  Restoration.  The  spirit  of  the  Parlia- 
ment during  the  stormy  times  of  the  civil  war  and 
the  Commonwealth  was  scarcely  conducive  to  the 
erecting  of  ecclesiastical  edifices,  and  it  will  be  remem- 
bered that  the  year  1643  witnessed  the  passing  of  an 
act  ordering  the  removal  of  all  the  crosses  and  images 
from  places  of  public  worship,  and  St.  Paul's  cross 
itself  and  the  adjacent  pulpit,  from  which  so  many 
famous  sermons  had  been  preached,  suffered  the  fate 
of  the  others  and  was  pulled  down. 

St.  Paul's,  Covent  Garden,  remained  therefore  Inigo 
Jones'  sole  ecclesiastical  achievement  of  importance. 
Though  begun  in  1631  and  consecrated  in  1638,  it 
was  not  until  1645  that  it  was  constituted  into  an 
independent  parish,  it  having  previously  been  regarded 
merely  as  a  chapel  of  ease  for  St.  Martin-in-the- 
Fields,  which  parish  had  been  established  in  1535. 
The  church  of  St.  Paul,  which  was  constructed  at  the 
expense  of  Francis,  Earl  of  Bedford,  is  probably  the 
most  conspicuous,  if  not  the  most  valuable,  of  the 
works  of  the  famous  architect  under  whose  guidance 
it  was  erected.  Though  originally  intended  to  face 
the  square,  it  was  decided,  for  ecclesiastical  reasons, 
that  it  must  face  the  other  way,  so  that  the  altar 
might  occupy  the  accustomed  position.  Accordingly, 


390  LONDON. 

it  backs  on  the  square  and  faces  the  west,  being 
accessible  from  Bedford  Street  by  an  open  passage. 
The  portico,  which  had  been  seriously  damaged,  was 
restored  at  the  expense  of  the  Earl  of  Burlington  in 
1727,  and  in  1788  an  outer  coating  of  Portland  stone 
was  added  to  the  walls,  while  the  rustic  gateways, 
which  had  been  imitated  by  Jones  from  Palladio, 
were  rebuilt  in  stone.  In  1888  the  outer  stone  coat- 
ing was  cleared  away  and  the  original  red  brick  walls 
laid  to  view.  The  interior  was  done  over  and  restored 
in  1872.  The  eminent  persons  buried  here  include 
Robert  Carr,  Earl  of  Somerset  (died  1645),  Sir  Henry 
Herbert,  master  of  the  revels  under  Charles  I.  (died 
1673),  Samuel  Butler,  the  author  of  "Hudibras" 
(died  1680),  Sir  Peter  Lely,  the  great  painter  (died 
1680),  Dick  Estcourt,  the  actor  and  noted  wit  (died 
1711),  Edward  Kynaston,  the  female  impersonator 
(died  1712),  William  Wycherly,  the  dramatist  (died 
1715),  Grinling  Gibbons,  the  sculptor  (died  1721), 
Susannah  Centlivre,  author  of  u  The  Busybody " 
and  "The  Wonder,"  James  Worsdale,  the  painter 
(died  1767),  Charles  Macklin,  the  actor  (died  1797), 
John  Wolcot,  "  Peter  Pindar,"  the  author  of  the 
"Louisiad"  (died  1819),  and  other  celebrities. 

The  injury  to  Whitehall  during  the  fire  of  1615 
had  caused  the  removal  of  the  king  and  the  court  to 
the  adjoining  palace  of  St.  James,  and  here  it  was 
that  a  great  part  of  the  Stuart  reigns  were  spent. 
Though  altered,  remodeled  and  transformed  from  a 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.  391 

leper  hospital  into  a  palace  by  Henry  VIII.,  that 
monarch  had  always  preferred  Whitehall,  which  he 
had  wrested  from  Wolsey.  It  may  have  been  that 
on  second  thought  he  inclined  rather  to  succeed  that 
stately  prelate  than  the  lepers  whom  he  had  sent 
howling  homeless  through  the  streets.  Mary,  how- 
ever, held  her  court  at  St.  James,  as  the  associations 
of  Anne  Boleyn's  triumphs  and  her  mother's  sorrows 
would  have  made  a  residence  there  altogether  too 
distressing.  Elizabeth  cut  the  Gordian  knot  by  spend- 
ing much  of  her  time  at  Somerset  House,  but  the 
Stuarts  had  a  decided  preference  for  St.  James,  and 
when  not  at  Hampton  Court  or  Windsor,  were  usually 
at  their  palace  on  the  Mall.  The  present  Mall  was 
then  merely  a  broad  walk  in  the  gardens  of  St. 
James'  Palace,  and  the  Mall  so  frequently  referred  to 
is  the  present  Pall  Mall,  so  named  from  the  fact  that 
it  was  a  place  specially  set  aside  for  the  game  of 
"  Palamaglio  "  or  "  Paille  Maille,"  a  species  of  cro- 
quet which  had  been  introduced  from  Italy  into 
France  in  the  preceding  century,  and  brought  over 
from  France  into  England  in  the  days  of  James  I. 
Thus  also  the  name  of  Birdcage  Walk  is  derived 
from  the  aviary  which  was  established  in  the  royal 
pleasure  grounds  of  St.  James,  at  the  place  where 
to-day  the  walk  above  mentioned  is  situated.  Charles 
I.  carried  the  royal  gardening  and  parking  further 
west  again,  and,  while  Hyde  Park  had  been  set  aside 
as  a  sort  of  royal  preserve  by  Henry  VIII.,  and  it 


392  LONDON. 

is  from  Anne  Hyde,  consort  of  James  II.,  that  it  de- 
rives its  present  appellation,  it  obtained  something  of 
its  present  definite  form  under  Charles  I.,  to  whom  is 
due  the  making  of  that  drive  which  is  known  to-day 
as  the  Ring. 

Society  had,  in  the  days  of  the  early  Stuarts,  mi- 
grated more  than  ever  to  the  Strand,  and  was  spread- 
ing itself  by  a  gradual  process  north  of  that  street, 
into  the  neighborhood  of  Covent  Garden.  But  it 
must  not  be  supposed  that  fashion  had  altogether 
abandoned  the  older  localities,  for,  in  the  reign  of 
James  I.,  Henry  Percy,  ninth  Earl  of  Northumber- 
land, lived  in  great  state  at  the  Minories,  between 
Aldgate  and  Tower  Hill ;  while  Lord  Cottington  and 
Sir  William  Cockayne,  lord  mayor  in  1619,  had  man- 
sions in  Old  Broad  Street,  and  it  was  at  his  residence 
in  the  last-named  street  that  the  latter  gave,  during 
his  mayoralty,  his  great  entertainment  in  honor  of 
James  I.  Sir  Paul  Pindar,  the  merchant  prince,  lived 
in  Bishopsgate  Street.  Aldersgate  Street  also  pos- 
sessed many  fine  mansions.  Here  the  Marquis  of 
Dorchester  resided  at  Peter  House,  and  the  Earl  of 
Thanet  at  Thanet  House.  Somewhat  further  west  we 
find  Lady  Hatton  living  side  by  side  with  Gondomar, 
the  Spanish  ambassador,  in  Ely  Place,  the  site  of  their 
many  quarrels.  Lady  Hatton  was,  in  fact,  perhaps 
more  famous  for  her  quarrels  than  for  her  parties. 
She  was,  however,  an  accomplished  woman  in  more 
ways  than  one,  and  when  she  entertained  usually  did 


Marble  Arch,  Hyde  Park 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.  393 

it  handsomely,  receiving  many  of  the  best  people. 
Royalty  often  attended,  and  in  1617  she  was  on 
one  occasion  honored  by  the  king's  presence.  Gon- 
domar,  her  next-door  neighbor,  was  largely  feted, 
wined  and  dined.  Of  all  the  fetes  given  in  his  honor, 
and  they  were  numerous,  that  which  he  attended  at 
Sir  Arthur  Chichester's  in  1624  was  not  perhaps  the 
least  noted.  Further  west  again  was  Brooke  House, 
the  residence  of  Fulke  Greville,  Lord  Brooke,  coun- 
sellor to  Queen  Elizabeth  and  James  I.,  and  a  great 
friend  of  Sir  Philip  Sidney.  It  stood  on  the  north 
side  of  the  street,  a  little  beyond  Furnival's  Inn.  It 
had  originally  been  called  Bath  House,  from  Bour- 
chier,  Earl  of  Bath,  by  whom  it  had  been  largely 
altered  and  in  part  rebuilt.  Here  Lord  Brooke  was 
murdered  by  his  own  servant  on  December  1,  1628, 
and  his  house  was  leased  by  the  crown  and  fitted  up 
for  the  reception  of  the  French  ambassador.  On 
Holborn  also  was  Southampton  House,  the  town 
house  of  the  Wriothesley,  Earls  of  Southampton.  It 
was  on  the  south  side  of  the  street,  a  little  above 
Holborn  Bars,  and  became  far-famed  for  its  hospi- 
tality. It  was  taken  down  in  1552,  though  a  portion 
was  retained  as  late  as  1850  in  Griffiths'  (the  whip- 
maker)  warehouse,  while  other  fragments  were  re- 
tained in  the  Blue  Post  Tavern  at  No.  47  South- 
ampton Buildings.  Another  great  house  in  the  same 
neighborhood  was  Weld  House,  Lincoln's  Inn  Fields. 
This  was  the  residence  of  Sir  Edward  Stradling,  and 


394  LONDON. 

was  erected  by  him  during  the  reign  of  Charles  I. 
The  ground  on  which  it  stood  was  called  "Oldwicke 
Close."  The  place  was  sold  in  1651  to  Humphrey 
Weld,  son  of  Sir  Humphrey  Weld,  lord  mayor  in 
1608,  and  was  thus  given  the  name  of  Weld  House. 
On  the  Strand,  besides  the  houses  famous  in  the 
days  of  Elizabeth  for  entertaining,  others  now  arose. 
Here  Salisbury  House,  which  had  only  been  partly 
completed  when  Elizabeth  died,  now  reared  its  noble 
facade;  here  Thomas  Cecil,  Earl  of  Exeter,  son  of 
the  great  Lord  Burleigh,  had  erected  for  himself  a 
splendid  mansion,  known  as  Exeter  House,  on  the 
site  of  the  present  Exeter  Street.  The  Earl  of 
Dorset,  better  known  as  Thomas  Sackville,  the  poet, 
lived  in  Fleet  Street,  in  what  had  formerly  been  the 
town  house  of  the  Bishops  of  Salisbury.  Also  on  the 
Strand  stood  Bedford  House,  the  residence  of  the 
Earl  of  Bedford,  where  the  Earl  of  Rutland,  who 
then  resided  there,  in  1622  entertained  Lord  Bacon. 
At  the  western  end  of  the  Strand,  near  where  North- 
umberland Avenue  now  issues  from  Trafalgar 
Square,  stood  Northampton  House,  built  in  1605  by 
Henry  Howard,  Earl  of  Northampton.  It  was  by 
his  will  left  to  his  nephew,  Thomas  Howard,  Earl  of 
Suffolk,  and  continued  for  some  time  to  be  called 
Suffolk  House,  though  in  1642  it  passed,  by  the  mar- 
riage of  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  the  second  Earl  of 
Suffolk,  with  Algernon  Percy,  tenth  Earl  of  North- 
umberland, into  the  possession  of  the  house  of 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      395 

Percy,  from  which  it  derived  its  later  name  of  North- 
umberland House.  Next  door  resided,  in  the  days 
of  Charles  I.,  Sir  Harry  Vane,  where  now  stands  the 
Grand  Hotel.  The  house  was  for  many  years  the 
residence  of  the  Secretary  of  State. 

Not  far  from  the  last-mentioned  mansion  was  Wal- 
lingford  House,  at  Whitehall,  the  splendid  residence 
of  George  Villiers,  Duke  of  Buckingham.  It  stood 
on  the  site  of  the  present  Admiralty,  and  derived  its 
name  from  Sir  William  Knollys,  treasurer  of  the 
household  of  Queen  Elizabeth  and  James  I.,  who  was 
at  one  and  the  same  time  Baron  Knollys,  Viscount 
Wallingford  and  Earl  of  Banbury.  The  Duke  of 
Buckingham  purchased  the  house  from  Lord  Walling- 
ford. Here  Buckingham's  eldest  son,  the  author  of 
"The  Rehearsal,"  was  born.  It  was  here  that  he 
was  residing  when  he  received  the  appointment  of 
lord  high  admiral ;  and  on  his  assassination,  August 
23,  1628,  the  young  duke  being  a  minor,  the  "Coun- 
cil of  the  Sea,"  or  Admiralty  Board,  continued  to  be 
held  there.  Here  also  was  the  lord  treasurer's  office ; 
and  here  it  was  that  the  Duchess  of  Buckingham  and 
her  new  husband,  Lord  Dunluce,  resided  after  the 
treasurer's  family  moved  out.  Another  house  famous 
in  social  annals  was  Berkshire  House,  the  town  house 
of  the  Earls  of  Berkshire,  facing  St.  James  Park, 
which  afterwards  became  the  residence  of  the  cele- 
brated Countess  of  Castlemaiue,  later  Duchess  of 
Cleveland. 


396  LONDON. 

While  Covent  Garden  had  not  reached  the  develop- 
ment which  it  attained  later  in  the  century,  it  already 
possessed  a  goodly  number  of  fine  mansions.  Clare 
House  Court,  on  the  east  side  of  Drury  Lane,  con- 
tained Clare  House,  the  town  house  of  the  Earls  of 
Clare.  Great  Queen  Street  possessed  many  fine 
houses,  of  which  a  large  part  had  been  designed  by 
Webb,  the  pupil  of  Inigo  Jones.  The  houses  were 
at  first  built  on  the  south  side  only,  but  later  houses 
on  the  north  side  were  also  erected.  Conde  di  Oniate, 
the  Spanish  ambassador,  and  Gondomar's  successor, 
resided  in  Long  Acre,  In  1635  Leicester  Fields, 
which  derives  its  name  from  the  mansion  of  the  Earls 
of  Leicester,  there  situated,  was  converted  into  a 
square,  though  the  south  side  was  not  closed  in  until 
1671.  Tothill  and  Canon  Row,  Westminster,  re- 
tained their  popularity,  but  were  regarded  as  being 
somewhat  remote.  Still  there  were  a  number  of  fine 
houses  there,  notably  the  residences  of  the  Earl  of 
Hereford  and  of  the  Earl  of  Cumberland.  There 
also  resided  the  famous  Anne,  Countess  of  Dorset. 
Dorset  Court  marks  the  site  of  Dorset  House,  just  as 
Derby  Street  does  that  of  the  mansion  of  the  Earls 
of  Derby,  and  Manchester  Buildings  that  of  the 
houses  of  the  Earls  of  Lincoln  and  the  Dukes  of 
Manchester. 

As  regards  the  popular  amusements,  they  remained 
much  what  they  had  been  under  the  Tudors.  One 
of  the  great  events  of  the  year  was  still  St.  James' 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      397 

Fair,  held  in  the  open  space  near  St.  James'  Palace. 
This  was  always  held  on  the  eve  of  St.  James' 
Day,  on  the  day  itself,  the  morrow  and  the  four  days 
following.  Permission  to  hold  it  had  been  granted  to 
the  hospital  by  Edward  I.,  and,  though  prohibited  by 
an  act  of  Parliament,  in  1651,  on  account  of  the 
turbulence  which  it  occasioned,  the  fair  was  re-estab- 
lished at  the  Restoration.  Besides  the  booths  at 
which  every  variety  of  objects  were  sold  and  pur- 
chased, there  were  booths  at  which  every  variety  of 
amusement  was  provided,  from  cockfights  and  acro- 
batic performances  to  musical  comedy  and  every 
species  of  dancing.  For  cockfighting,  however,  a 
special  license  was  required,  the  issuing  of  which  was 
the  prerogative  of  the  groom  porter  of  the  lord  cham- 
berlain's department.  Cockfighting  was,  however, 
by  no  means  limited  to  booths  at  St.  James'  Fair. 
The  royal  palace  of  Whitehall  itself  had  a  cockpit 
attached  to  it,  in  the  same  fashion  as  billiard  rooms  are 
now  considered  a  necessary  adjunct  to  a  present- day 
residence.  It  was  quite  customary  in  the  days  when 
Henry  VIII.  and  Anne  Boleyn  held  their  court  at 
Whitehall  for  the  royal  pair  and  their  evening  guests 
to  spend  a  leisurely  hour  in  watching  the  ancient 
sport.  In  the  time  of  Elizabeth,  of  James  I.  and 
Charles  I.  the  cockpit  was  used  as  a  Theatre  Royal, 
where  performances,  attended  by  the  monarch,  were 
given,  as  it  was  not  customary  during  those  reigns  for 
the  sovereign  to  attend  a  public  theatre.  When,  how- 


398  LONDON. 

ever,  the  place  ceased  to  serve  the  purpose  originally 
intended  does  not  seem  to  be  clear.  The  royal 
cockpit  at  Whitehall  was  not  the  only  building  de- 
voted to  this  sport.  Another  cockpit  also  much 
frequented  was  that  which  stood  by  the  steps  which 
led  from  Birdcage  Walk  into  Dartmouth  Street,  near 
the  top  of  Queen  Street,  Westminster.  The  building 
was  distinguished  for  its  cupola.  Hogarth's  print  of 
"  The  Cockpit "  gives  an  excellent  idea  of  the  scenes 
which  were  daily  enacted  within  the  building.  The 
structure  remained  until  1816,  when  it  was  pulled 
down.  It  had  long  since  been  deserted  for  the  cock- 
pit which  had  been  established  behind  Gray's  Inn. 

The  Cockpit  which  had  been  one  of  the  principal 
features  of  Drury  Lane  during  the  later  Tudor  period 
had,  shortly  after  the  accession  of  James  I.,  been 
converted  into  a  public  playhouse,  and  had  come  to 
be  known  as  the  Phoenix  Theatre.  It  was,  however, 
principally  devoted  to  popular  performances  of  not  a 
very  high-class  character,  and  had,  indeed,  attained 
such  disfavor  that  an  attack  by  the  apprentices  of 
London,  who  had  from  time  immemorial  claimed  and 
exercised  the  right  of  demolishing  all  "  houses  of  ill 
fame,"  was  made  upon  it  during  the  night  of  Shrove 
Tuesday,  March  4,  1617,  and  the  property  with  diffi- 
culty protected.  It  was  converted  into  a  schoolhouse 
in  1647,  but  the  next  year  returned  to  its  old  use.  It 
was  finally  pulled  down  in  1 649,  and  a  new  theatre 
erected  on  the  site  was  opened  in  1658;  and  here 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      399 

subsequently  came  to  be  performed  the  French  and 
Italian  opera. 

Of  the  other  theatres  belonging  to  the  early  Stuart 
reigns,  Whitefriars  Theatre,  the  Salisbury  Court 
Theatre  and  the  so-called  Duke's  Theatre  in  Dorset 
Gardens  were  the  most  noted  and  popular.  The  first 
mentioned,  which  was  none  other  than  the  refectory 
of  the  dissolved  Whitefriars  monastery,  stood  without 
the  garden  wall  of  Salisbury,  or  Dorset,  House,  the 
old  inn  or  hostelry  of  the  Bishops  of  Salisbury.  The 
patent  which  mentions  Whitefriars  as  a  theatre  bears 
the  date  1610,  though  it  has  been  asserted  that  plays 
were  acted  in  Whitefriars  Hall,  before  it  was  turned 
into  a  theatre,  as  early  as  1580.  The  second — namely, 
the  Salisbury  Court  Theatre — was  in  Salisbury  Court 
itself,  off  Fleet  Street.  It  was  originally  the  barn,  or 
granary,  at  the  lower  end  of  the  great  backyard  of 
Salisbury  House  itself,  but  was  in  1629  turned  into 
a  theatre  by  those  noted  actors,  Grinnell  and  Blagrove. 
In  1652  it  was  bought  by  Beeston,  the  actor,  who 
practically  rebuilt  it,  and  opened  it  in  1660.  It  was 
here  that  Davenant  and  his  company  played  for  some 
little  time,  leaving  the  Cockpit,  and  until  the  new 
theatre  in  Portugal  Row  was  ready  to  receive  them. 
The  building  suffered  destruction  in  the  great  fire,  and 
was  never  rebuilt.  The  third — that  is,  the  Dorset 
Gardens  Theatre — stood  in  Dorset,  near  Fleet  Street, 
so  named  after  Dorset  House,  and  so  called  the  Dor- 
set Gardens  from  the  fact  that  it  stood  in  what  had 


400  LONDON. 

been  the  gardens  of  that  mansion.  The  theatre 
fronted  the  river  on  the  east,  or  city,  side  of  Salisbury 
Court,  and  had  an  open  space  before  it  for  the 
accommodation  of  coaches,  while  a  stone  stairway  led 
down  to  the  Thames  for  the  convenience  of  those  who 
came  in  barges  on  the  river.  Opposite,  on  the  Surrey 
side  of  the  Thames,  the  Hope,  at  Bankside,  South- 
wark,  was  perhaps  the  most  noted.  It  had  been 
built  in  1613  by  Henslow,  and  opened  by  him  as  a 
bear  garden,  but  was  so  constructed  with  a  movable 
stage  as  to  be  easily  adapted  for  the  acting  of  plays. 
Jonson's  "  Bartholomew's  Fair  "  was  first  brought  out 
here,  and  here  it  was  that  Taylor,  the  "  water  poet," 
challenged  Fennor  "  to  answer  him  at  a  trial  of  wit." 
The  tavern  of  this  time  was  still  simply  the  public 
house,  "where  rough  joke  and  brawl  did  flourish," 
and  not  the  debating  club  of  the  later  Stuart  and  the 
Georgian  period.  As  an  institution,  however,  the 
tavern  was  none  the  less  popular.  Among  the  most 
noted  of  these  resorts  Garraway's  Coffee  House, 
Change  Alley,  Cornhill,  and  the  Mermaid  Tavern,  in 
Bread  Street,  Cheap,  had  attained  perhaps  a  special 
celebrity.  The  first  of  these  establishments  owes  its 
foundation  to  one  Thomas  Garraway,  or  Garvvay,  a 
tobacconist  and  coffee  merchant,  and  obtained  its 
original  celebrity  as  the  first  shop  in  London  city 
where  tea  was  sold  and  dispensed,  Garraway  himself 
being  loud  in  his  praise  of  the  new  beverage,  which 
he  claimed  alleviated  all  pain  and  cured  all  possible 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.  401 

disorders.  In  fact,  the  place  may  be  said,  notwith- 
standing that  it  retained  its  appellation  of  "  coffee 
house,"  to  have  been  the  first  "  tea  room  "  in  London. 
But  Garraway  did  not  limit  himself  to  the  sale  of 
either  tea  or  coffee,  for  his  establishment  was  also 
widely  known  for  its  large  and  excellent  stock  of 
"cherry  wine,"  and  also  as  a  general  lunch  room, 
where  sandwiches,  punch  and  pale  ale  were  also 
obtainable.  The  Mermaid  Tavern,  in  Bread  Street, 
Cheap,  was  the  favorite  resort  of  a  number  of  Shakes- 
peare's disciples,  much  affected  by  Ben  Jonson  and 
his  friends,  and  by  him  celebrated  in  verse.  The 
tavern  was  in  existence  as  early  as  the  first  decades 
of  the  preceding  century,  and  the  "  Pastime  of  the 
People"  (folio  1529)  is  described  as  "copy led  and 
emprynted  in  Chepesyde,  at  the  Sygne  of  the  Mear- 
mayd,  next  to  Polly's  Gate."  It  was  here  that  John 
Rashell,  the  printer,  brother-in-law  of  Sir  Thomas 
More,  lived  and  plied  his  trade.  Old  Fish  Street 
was  also  famous  for  its  public  houses.  There  stood 
the  tavern  of  the  King's  Head,  with  the  effigy  of 
Henry  VII.  as  its  signboard,  while  in  the  Beaufroy 
collection,  at  the  Guildhall,  is  the  signboard  of  the 
Will  Somers'  Tavern,  which  also  stood  in  Old  Fish 
Street,  and  which  bears  the  likeness  of  Will  Somers, 
court  jester  to  Henry  VIII.,  while  still  another  of 
the  Old  Fish  Street  taverns  was  dedicated  to  the  sign 
of  Cardinal  Wolsey.  The  Boar's  Head  and  the 
Swan,  also  in  Old  Fish  Street,  were  both  celebrated 
VOL.  I.— 26 


402  LONDON. 

in   their   day,   and   both   are   commemorated   in  the 
"  Newes  from  St.  Bartholomew  Fayre." 

Westward  of  the  city  walls  the  first  tavern  of  note 
to  attract  the  passer-by,  on  leaving  Ludgate,  was  that 
famous  establishment  dedicated  to  the  sign  of  "La 
Belle  Sauvage."  Here  in  a  back  room  plays  were 
acted  and  other  entertainments  provided  for  the 
amusement  of  the  guests.  The  origin  of  the  name 
has  given  ground  for  interesting  and  prolonged  dis- 
pute between  learned  antiquaries.  The  "  Spectator  " 
speaks  of  the  name  as  derived  from  an  old  metrical 
romance  translated  out  of  the  French,  which  romance 
tells  the  tale  of  a  beautiful  woman  found  in  a  wilder- 
ness, who  is  referred  to  in  the  French  version  as  "  la 
belle  sauvage,"  a  name  given  also  to  the  English 
translation.  Though  accepted  by  Pennant  as  the 
accurate  derivation,  it  seems  perhaps  a  little  far- 
fetched, the  more  especially  as  the  romance  referred 
to  cannot  be  said  to  have  ever  been  popular.  Thus 
the  derivation  given  by  Douce,  who  claims  that  the 
beautiful  savage  in  question  was  none  other  than 
Solomon's  friend,  the  Queen  of  Sheba,  who  in  the 
metrical  romance  of  Alexander — attributed  to  Alex- 
ander Davie,  and  which  appeared  in  the  beginning 
of  the  fourteenth  century — is  spoken  of  as  "  sibely 
sauvage,"  said  by  Douce  to  be  a  corruption  of  "si 
belle  sauvage,"  seems  equally  remote  and  improbable. 
An  argument  in  favor  of  this  last  named  derivation 
is  that  the  Queen  of  Sheba  seems  quite  as  well  suited 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.  403 

to  the  purpose  of  a  tavern  sign  as  the  Three  Wise 
Men,  which  was  the  token  of  several  inns  and  taverns, 
and  that  there  was,  in  fact,  in  Gracechurch  Street  a 
tavern  actually  dedicated  to  "  La  Reine  de  Saba." 

Akerman,  in  his  "  Tradesmen  Tokens,"  gives,  how- 
ever, a  representation  of  the  sign  as  that  of  an  Indian 
girl  holding  a  bow  and  arrow,  from  which  the  idea 
gained  a  certain  degree  of  popular  credence  that  the 
"  belle  sauvage  "  in  question  was  none  other  than  the 
far-famed  Pocahontas ;  but  Burn  denies  the  correct- 
ness of  Akerman's  representation,  and  ascribes  his 
mistake  in  the  matter  to  the  confusion  arising  from 
the  fact  that  an  armed  Indian  woman  appears  as  the 
sinister  supporter  in  the  armorial  bearings  of  the 
Distillers  Company.  It  will  be  remembered  that  after 
the  Smith  rescuing  episode,  so  dear  to  the  Virginian 
historiograph,  Pocahontas  had  become  a  Christian, 
married  a  certain  John  Ralph,  and  accompanied  him 
to  England.  Learning  of  her  services,  Anne  of 
Denmark,  the  illustrious  consort  of  James  I.,  com- 
manded that  she  be  presented  to  her,  and  the  Indian 
girl,  who  was  the  daughter  of  the  noted  chief  Pow- 
hatan,  figured  quite  prominently  for  a  brief  period 
on  the  stage  of  London  society,  and  was  loaded  by  the 
queen  with  marks  of  the  royal  appreciation  and  grati- 
tude. She  was  on  the  point  of  embarking  for  America 
when  she  died  at  Gravesend,  in  1617,  and  was  there 
buried.  It  has  been  held  not  unlikely,  therefore, 
that  a  tavern  which  rose  to  a  certain  celebrity  at  about 


404  LONDON. 

this  time  should  have  been  accorded  the  sign  of  "  La 
Belle  Sauvage  "  in  compliment  to  the  popular  heroine 
of  the  day.  It  is,  at  any  rate,  a  pretty  story,  and  as 
such  is  given  here. 

Pegge  has  it,  on  the  other  hand,  that  the  name  of 
the  tavern  originated  in  that  of  an  early  hostess,  a  cer- 
tain Isabella  Savage,  whose  name  is  said  to  appear  on 
an  old  lease  of  the  premises.  Other  authorities,  how- 
ever, declare  in  favor  of  still  another  story,  maintain- 
ing that  the  place  was  originally  known  as  the  Bell, 
but  that  it  came  later  to  be  known  as  Savage's  Inn, 
from  the  fact  that  at  one  time  its  proprietor  bore  that 
name,  and  that  by  a  conjunction  of  the  two  designa- 
tions arose  the  name  which  has  been  the  cause  of  so 
much  controversy  and  discussion.  Reference  is  also 
made  to  a  tavern  of  that  name  by  Lambarde,  who, 
writing  before  1576,  of  "the  treble  oblation,  first  to 
the  Confessor,  then  to  Sainct  Runwald,  and  lastly  to 
the  gracious  Rootle,"  remarks  that  without  it  "  the 
poor  pilgrims  could  not  assure  themselves  any  good, 
gained  by  all  their  labors,  no  more  than  such  as  go  to 
Paris  Garden,  the  Bell  Savage,  or  Theatre,  can  ac- 
count of  any  pleasant  spectacle,  unless  they  first  pay 
one  pennie  at  the  gate,  another  at  the  entrie  of  the 
scaifolde,  and  a  third  for  a  quiet  standing."  This 
would  undoubtedly  go  to  show  that  a  tavern  dedicated 
to  the  Bell  Savage,  presumably  identical  with  "La 
Belle  Sauvage,"  existed  already  in  Tudor  days,  long 
previous  to  the  accession  of  the  Stuarts,  and  would 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      405 

seem  thus  effectively  to  dispose  of  the  Pocahontas 
story.  Those  in  favor  of  the  story,  however,  advance 
the  opinion  that  the  tavern  referred  to  by  Lambarde 
had  no  connection  with  the  one  which  subsequently 
came  to  be  known  as  "  La  Belle  Sauvage,"  and  assert, 
moreover,  that  that  tavern  was  in  Tudor  times  known 
as  the  "  Sign  of  the  Rose,"  basing  their  statement  on 
the  evidence  afforded  by  the  will  of  one  John  Cray- 
thorne,  who  in  the  year  1558  bequeathed  "the  house, 
together  with  his  own  messuage,"  to  the  Cutlers 
Company.  The  will,  however,  would  go  to  show  that 
it  was  his  "  own  messuage,"  and  not  "  the  house,"  by 
which  presumably  is  meant  the  tavern  which  went  by 
the  name  of  the  "Sign  of  the  Rose."  Be  this  as  it 
may,  the  gift  was  gratefully  accepted  by  the  Cutlers 
Company,  and  two  exhibitions  at  Oxford  and  one  at 
Cambridge,  besides  certain  gifts  to  the  poor  of  St. 
Bride's,  are  still  provided  out  of  the  bequest.  The 
Pocahontas  story  is  further  discredited  by  the  state- 
ment of  Stow,  and  other  authorities  assert  that  it  was 
at  the  "Bell  Savage"  that,  in  Queen  Mary's  reign, 
Sir  Thomas  Wyatt  was  stopped  in  his  ill-planned 
rebellion.  Later,  in  the  days  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
the  place  became  temporarily  a  school  of  defence,  and 
here  Bankes  exhibited  his  horse  Marocco,  whose  ex- 
traordinary accomplishments  gave  rise  to  the  publi- 
cation of  that  wonderful  pamphlet,  "  Maroccus  Ex- 
taticus" 

The  Devil's  Tavern,  at  Temple  Bar,  was  another 


406  LONDON. 

tavern  of  great  celebrity.  It  stood  between  Temple 
Bar  and  Middle  Temple  Gate,  and  the  church  of  St. 
Dunstan  in  the  West,  which  was  nearly  opposite,  prob- 
ably gave  the  tavern  its  original  appellation  of  St. 
Dunstan's  Tavern.  The  sign,  however,  represented 
St.  Dunstan  pulling  the  devil  by  the  nose,  and,  that 
more  popular  personage  soon  eclipsing  his  saintly 
companion,  his  name  soon  became  that  by  which  the 
tavern  came  to  be  known.  The  principal  chamber 
was  called  the  Apollo.  Here  Ben  Jonson,  with  his 
followers,  often  held  his  court,  just  as  Dryden  did  later 
on  at  Wills',  and  Addison  at  Button's.  The  landlord 
of  the  Devil's  Tavern,  in  the  days  of  Jonson,  was  Simon 
Wadloe,  the  original  of  "Old  Sir  Simeon  the  King," 
the  favorite  air  of  Squire  Western,  in  "Tom  Jones," 
and  possibly  an  ancestor  of  "  Simple  Simon  "  of  nurs- 
ery ballad  fame.  The  rules  of  the  club  or  "  leges  con- 
viviales"  for  club  it  practically  came  to  be,  were 
drawn  up  by  Jonson  himself  in  the  most  elegant 
Latin,  and  graven  in  gold  letters  in  the  marble  over 
the  chimney-piece.  They  were  probably  drawn  up 
in  1624,  and  are  the  predecessors  of  modern  club  by- 
laws. It  was  at  the  Devil's  Tavern  that  Killigrew 
laid  the  scene  of  "  The  Parson's  Wedding."  It  is 
frequently  alluded  to  by  Jonson  in  his  writings,  and 
is  also  referred  to  in  Rowley's  "A  Match  at  Mid- 
night." After  the  meetings  of  the  Royal  Society  at 
Arundel  House,  it  was  not  unusual  for  the  president 
and  members  to  adjourn  for  supper  and  more  con- 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      407 

vivial  talk  to  the  Devil's  Tavern,  and  here  on  March 
18,  1703,  occurred  the  memorable  sale  of  the  jewels 
of  the  Duchess  of  Richmond,  better  known  as  "  la 
Belle  Stuart."  In  1746  the  Royal  Society,  which 
had  been  holding  their  dinners  at  Pontack's,  in  Ab- 
church  Lane,  removed  their  dining-place  by  formal 
vote  to  the  "Devil  Tavern  at  Temple  Bar,"  and  some 
years  later,  in  1751,  Dr.  Johnson  is,  like  his  earlier 
namesake,  recorded  as  "  making  a  night  of  it  "  at  the 
Devil's  Tavern.  The  Apollo  Hall  was  used  for  con- 
certs in  1752,  while  some  years  later,  in  1774,  Dr. 
Kenrick  used  it  for  his  Shakespearean  lectures.  In 
1775  it  was  again  turned  into  a  concert  hall,  and  the 
year  following  became  the  meeting-place  of  the  Pande- 
monium Club.  In  1787  the  building  was  torn  down, 
and  no  vestige  now  remains  of  this  once  famous 
hostelry.  Childs'  Bank  stands,  in  fact,  on  the  exact 
site.  A  representation  of  the  Devil's  Tavern,  as  it 
was  in  Hogarth's  time,  appears  among  his  Hudibras 
prints,  though  unfortunately,  from  a  reversal  of  the 
drawing,  the  house  seems  on  the  wrong  side  of  the 
way.  A  more  correct  view,  therefore,  is  to  be  had 
in  the  print  of  Temple  Bar,  after  Wale,  in  Dodsley's 
"London,"  Vol.  I.,  1761. 

The  Swan,  at  Charing  Cross,  was  much  in  favor  as 
a  sort  of  half-way  house  between  London  town  and 
St.  James,  and  the  drawer  of  this  famous  hostelry,  a 
certain  Ralph  by  name,  was  introduced  by  Jouson  in 
the  extempore  grace  which  that  facetious  wit  and 


408  LONDON. 

dramatist  composed  for  "King  James."  In  High 
Holborn  the  Blue  Boar  Inn  as  early  as  1616  had 
earned  for  itself  well-deserved  popularity  as  the  best 
"  stopping-place "  on  the  road  from  Newgate ;  while 
Taylor's  Tavern  and  Wills'  Coffee  House  were  the 
special  favorites  of  the  region  around  Coven t  Garden. 
The  former  stood  in  Phoenix  Alley,  out  of  Long  Acre, 
now  Hanover  Court,  the  passage  next  west  to  Bow 
Street,  and  derived  its  name  from  one  John  Taylor, 
the  "water  poet,"  who  ran  the  establishment,  though 
in  reality  the  tavern  was  formerly  designated  first  as 
at  the  sign  of  the  Mourning  Crown,  and  later  as  at 
the  sign  of  the  Poet's  Head,  his  own  effigy  appearing 
as  the  signboard,  with  beneath  it  the  following  inscrip- 
tion :  "  There's  many  a  head  stands  for  a  sign ;  then, 
gentle  reader,  why  not  mine  ?"  Wills'  Coffee  House, 
on  the  other  hand,  was  in  Bow  Street  itself,  and  stood 
on  the  west  side  of  that  renowned  thoroughfare,  at  the 
corner  of  Russell  Street,  and  was  so  called  from  one 
William  Urwin,  by  whom  it  was  kept.  The  original 
sign  of  the  house,  Scott  tells  us,  had  been  a  Crow, 
but  had  been  changed  in  Dryden's  time  to  a  Rose. 
In  this  statement  it  is  evident  that  confusion  exists 
between  Wills'  establishment  and  the  Rose  Tavern, 
which  is  on  the  south  side  of  Russell  Street,  at  the 
corner  of  Brydges  Street.  The  change  from  the  Crow 
to  the  Rose  seems  also  doubtful,  and  if  such  a  change 
was  made,  it  must  have  been  made  before  Drydeu's 
time.  Whatever  may  be  the  truth  about  this,  that 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.  409 

establishment  which  went  by  the  name  of  Wills'  had 
attained  great  celebrity  in  the  days  of  the  last-named 
poet,  and  here  it  was  that  Dry  den  sat  and  held  his 
court  of  followers,  just  as  Jonson  had  done  at  the 
Devil's.  Macaulay  gives  us  a  delightful  description 
of  these  literary  revels,  and  mention  is  made  of  this 
famous  tavern  in  a  vast  mass  of  literature,  and  allu- 
sions to  it  appear  in  the  "  Spectator,"  the  "  Tattler,"  in 
Pepys,  in  Pope,  in  Jonson,  and  in  others  too  numer- 
ous to  name. 

In  Westminster  the  Dog,  the  Leg,  the  Turk's  Head 
and  Miles'  Coffee  House  were  perhaps  the  most  noted. 
The  first  mentioned  was  somewhere  between  White- 
hall and  Westminster  Hall.  Here  Pepys  and  some 
of  his  friends  frequently  dined,  as  did  other  celebri- 
ties. The  Leg  Tavern  was  in  King  Street,  West- 
minster, and  was  a  house  in  decidedly  good  favor. 
The  sign  was  undoubtedly  derived  from  the  sign  used 
by  cobblers  and  bootmakers,  and  it  was  of  those  that 
the  tightly-fitting  boots  and  stockings  gave  rise  to 
Falstaff's  famous  simile.  The  Turk's  Head  is  de- 
scribed as  "  the  next  house  to  the  stairs,"  New  Palace 
Yard,  Westminster.  Here  the  famous  Rota  Club,  of 
which  Cyriac  Skinner,  Major  Wildman  and  Sir  Wil- 
liam Petty  were  prominent  members,  held  its  meet- 
ings. For  them  a  large  oval  table  was  made,  around 
which  sat  Harrington  and  his  virtuosi,  while  Miles, 
the  landlord,  delivered  his  coffee  from  a  passageway 
which  had  been  arranged  down  the  centre. 


410  LONDON. 

Of  suburban  inns,  the  Angel,  at  Islington,  and  the 
Elephant  and  Castle,  on  the  Surrey  side  of  the  river, 
were  perhaps  the  most  noted.  The  former,  though 
commonly  spoken  of  as  being  in  Islington,  was  really 
in  the  parish  of  Clerkenwell.  It  was  built  by  one 
William  Ryplingham  in  1638,  and  soon  rose  to  groat 
popularity  as  a  halting-place  for  the  traveller  approach- 
ing London  from  the  north.  Here  it  was  usual  for 
them  to  spend  the  night,  if  they  arrived  after  sun- 
down, as  the  road  between  the  inn  and  the  city  was 
infested  with  thieves,  who  not  only  assaulted  and 
robbed  their  victims  with  impunity,  but  often  mur- 
dered them,  if  resistance  was  made.  It  was  therefore 
usual  for  travellers  crossing  the  fields  to  Clerkenwell 
to  proceed  in  a  body  for  mutual  protection,  and  the 
bell  of  the  Angel  was  rung  at  certain  hours  of  depar- 
ture to  bring  such  parties  together.  The  inn  is  still 
in  existence,  but  has  been  much  altered  and  modern- 
ized in  the  course  of  centuries.  But  if  the  Angel 
ranked  first  among  suburban  inns  to  the  north  of 
London,  that  celebrated  hostelry,  the  Elephant  and 
Castle,  was  the  most  famous  of  suburban  inns  on  the 
Surrey  side,  for  the  Tabard  had  seen  its  best  days. 
Situated  at  Walworth,  about  a  mile  and  a  half  from 
Westminster,  and  at  an  equal  distance  from  Black- 
friars,  it  stood  where  the  Kenniugton,  Walworth  and 
New  Kent  Roads  meet,  and  was  therefore  at  the 
centre,  as  it  were,  of  the  highways  to  important 
places  in  Kent  and  Surrey.  It  soon  became  well 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      41 1 

known  for  its  welcome  and  good  cheer,  and  but  few 
travellers  going  southward  out  of  London  failed  to 
stop  thereat  and  refresh  themselves.  Like  that  of 
"  La  Belle  Sauvage,"  its  name  has  given  rise  to  singular 
speculations.  It  has  been  a  theory,  warmly  urged  by 
some  antiquaries,  that  the  name  of  the  inn  was  in  the 
first  instance  the  "  Infanta  del  Castillo,"  so  called  in 
honor  of  the  Infanta  Maria  Althea,  second  daughter 
of  Philip  III.  of  Spain,  to  whom  Prince  Charles, 
afterwards  Charles  L,  was  at  one  time  affianced.  The 
elephant,  with  or  without  the  howdah  or  castle  upon 
its  back,  was,  however,  not  uncommonly  pictured,  and 
might  therefore  have  just  as  easily  been  selected  for  a 
tavern  sign  as  the  goat,  the  green  dragon  or  the  red 
lion.  That  a  tavern  should  be  named  after  a  Spanish 
Infanta  who  had  never  visited  England,  even  though 
we  consider  her  promised  connection  with  the  country, 
and  the  great  and  evident  effort  made  by  the  court  to 
honor  and  popularize  everything  Spanish,  seems,  to 
say  the  least,  improbable.  It  may  also  be  added  that 
the  elephant  and  castle — that  is,  the  elephant  with 
a  castle  or  howdah  upon  its  back — appears  as  the 
crest  in  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  Cutlers  Com- 
pany, and  might  thus  easily  have  come  to  be  used  as 
a  tavern  sign  by  one  in  some  way  connected  with  the 
company,  or  in  the  case  of  a  tavern  built  on  land 
either  belonging  to  or  contiguous  to  land  which  was 
the  property  of  the  Cutlers  Company. 

Besides  the  theatres  and   other  places  of  regular 


412  LONDON. 

entertainment,  there  were  other  rendezvous,  the  most 
noted  of  which,  perhaps,  was  the  king's  Spring  Gar- 
dens at  Whitehall.  These  gardens  were  situated  be- 
tween St.  James  Park  and  Charing  Cross,  and  apper- 
tained properly  to  the  king's  palace  at  Whitehall. 
They  formed  part  of  the  royal  domain,  and  derived 
their  name  from  a  jet  or  spring  of  water,  "  which," 
it  is  said,  "  sprung  with  the  pressure  of  the  foot,  and 
wetted  whosoever  was  foolish  or  ignorant  enough  to 
tread  upon  it."  They  contained  butts,  a  pheasant 
yard,  a  bathing  pond  and  bowling  green,  and  from 
the  fact  that,  like  a  number  of  the  royal  parks  of  the 
present  day,  they  were  open  to  the  general  public  save 
on  some  special  occasion,  they  partook  at  once  of  a 
semi-private  and  semi-public  character.  At  the 
Restoration  the  gardens  wrere  closed  and  the  land 
built  upon,  and  only  the  name  survives  to-day  in  the 
locality  as  that  of  the  passage  leading  from  Trafalgar 
Square  into  St.  James  Park,  which  thoroughfare  and 
its  immediate  vicinity  has  been  inhabited  by  mauy 
distinguished  residents. 

It  was  not,  however,  to  be  supposed  that  the  public 
would  be  content  to  be  thus  deprived  of  the  privileges 
and  amusements  to  which  it  had  become  accustomed. 
The  need  of  some  new  place  where  similar  entertain- 
ments could  be  enjoyed  was  now  so  keenly  felt  that 
the  opening  of  Vauxhall,  at  Lambeth — a  public  pay 
garden,  where  promenade  concerts,  fireworks  and 
other  festivities  were  held — was  the  result;  nor  did 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      413 

this  suffice.  Two  other  well-known  rendezvous, 
where  gaming  and  bowling  were  the  main  attractions, 
were  opened  "  in  the  fields  behind  the  Muse  "  (Mews), 
and  came  to  be  known  respectively  as  Piccadilly  Hall 
and  Shaver's  Hall.  The  former  had  been  the  prop- 
erty of  one  Robert  Barker,  of  the  parish  of  St.  Marti  n- 
in-the-Fields,  and  was  sold  by  his  widow  to  Colonel 
Panton,  whose  name  is  preserved  to  us  in  Panton  Street, 
just  as  Coventry  Street  preserves  to  us  the  name  of 
Mr.  Secretary  Coventry,  of  the  reign  of  Charles  II. 
The  house  became  a  place  of  public  meeting,  where 
gaming  and  drinking  were  the  chief  distractions.  Sir 
John  Suckling,  the  poet,  was  one  of  the  greatest 
habitues  of  the  place,  and  a  story  is  related  of  his 
sisters  coming  down  to  "Piccadilly  bowling  green" 
to  entreat  him  not  to  lose  all  their  portions.  The 
situation  of  Piccadilly  Hall  seems  to  have  been  ascer- 
tained to  have  been  at  the  northeast  corner  of  the  Hay- 
market  and  Coventry  Streets.  Opposite,  on  the  south 
side  of  Coventry,  between  the  Hay  market  and  Hedge 
Lane,  stood  Shaver's  Hall,  also  a  noted  gaming  house 
and  place  of  public  resort.  It  was  erected  by  a 
gentleman  barber  in  the  service  of  Philip  Herbert, 
Earl  of  Pembroke  and  Montgomery.  Both  Picca- 
dilly Hall  and  Shaver's  Hall  were  the  favorite  resorts 
of  the  fast  world,  and  the  rooms  of  these  establish- 
ments were  nightly  the  scene  of  gay  and  brilliant 
gatherings.  Nor  has  the  locality  changed  much  in 
respect  to  its  character,  for  Piccadilly  Circus  is  still 


414  LONDON. 

to-day  the  centre  of  whatever  "  life  of  the  boulevard  " 
London  possesses. 

Whatever  the  streets  in  the  early  Stuart  reigns  may 
have  lacked  in  breadth  and  modern  traffic — and  they 
were  in  many  cases  at  once  narrow,  dark  and  tortu- 
ous— they  possessed  much  picturesqueness  and  general 
interest,  as  well  human  as  architectural,  and  not  a 
little  of  that  interest  was  in  that  luxurious  mode  of 
conveyance,  the  sedan  chair,  great  numbers  of  which 
were  forever  passing  and  repassing,  that  their  noble 
occupants  might  be  carried  hither  and  thither  to  their 
various  destinations.  But  the  sedan  chair  wras  already, 
so  to  speak,  a  doomed  article  of  furniture,  for  most 
persons  of  rank  and  fashion  had,  besides,  their  equi- 
pages, and  the  year  1650  witnessed  what  was  almost  a 
revolution  in  the  matter  of  public  conveyance;  for 
that  year,  it  is  recorded,  one  Captain  Bailey,  "  who 
hath  been  a  sea  captain,  but  now  lives  on  the  land 
about  the  city,  where  he  tries  experiments,  hath 
erected,  according  to  his  ability,  some  four  hackney 
coaches,  put  his  men  in  livery  and  appointed  them  to 
stand  at  the  Maypole  in  the  Strand,  giving  them  in- 
structions at  what  rates  to  carry  men  into  several 
parts  of  the  town,  where  all  day  they  may  be  had." 
Thus  was  the  first  stand  of  public  coaches  established. 
When  one  sees  the  immense  number  of  different 
forms  of  public  conveyances  which  now  crowd  the 
London  streets,  it  seems  perhaps  difficult  to  believe 
that  there  could  have  been  a  time  when  the  hansom 


LONDON  UNDER  THE  STUARTS.      415 

cab  and  the  four-wheeler  did  not  exist.  The  Maypole 
to  which  reference  is  made  is  not  that  at  St.  Andrew's, 
from  which  that  church  came  to  be  designated  as 
"  Undershaft,"  for  after  the  turbulent  episode  of  1519 
the  Maypole  festivities  at  St.  Mary  Axe  were  discon- 
tinued. The  one  referred  to  was  that  which  it  was 
customary  to  erect  at  St.  Mary  le  Strand,  the  open 
space  in  front  of  which  was  the  centre  of  the  popular 
rejoicings. 

The  illustrious  names  of  the  first  two  Stuart  reigns 
are  not  so  numerous  as  those  which  figured  in  the 
years  of  Elizabeth,  yet  many  there  were  who  were 
worthy  both  of  lasting  fame  and  of  gracing  the  royal 
circle.  Who  more  so  than  Sir  Kenelm  Digby,  that 
preux  chevalier  of  the  first  Charles'  court,  who, 
though  he  lost  much  by  his  time-servingness  under 
the  Protectorate,  combines  so  well  the  graces  of 
society  and  the  polished  elegance  of  the  best  literary 
style?  But  while  Digby  was  indulging  in  an  inquiry 
into  the  nature  of  "  Bodies  "  and  "  Peripatetic  Insti- 
tutions," Herrick  was  writing  poems  on  the  feats  of 
forest  fairies  and  Milton  was  enlarging  ou  the  regrets 
of  him  to  whom  "  Paradise  is  Lost,"  and  the  happi- 
ness of  him  to  whom  "  Paradise  is  Regained."  Of 
dramatists,  there  were  Thomas  Killigrew,  Massinger, 
James  Shirley  and  others  of  lesser  light,  while  the 
poets,  besides  the  bards  already  here  before  referred 
to,  numbered  Drayton,  of  "  Poly-Olbion  "  fame,  George 
Wither,  Cowley  and  Sir  John  Suckling.  Of  anti- 


416  LONDON. 

quaries  there  were  many,  including  Selden,  so  cele- 
brated for  his  "Table  Talk,"  Spelman,  Fuller, 
Somner  and  Sir  William  Dugdale.  Two  somewhat 
opposite,  but  equally  famous,  men  were  Harvey,  who 
discovered  that  "the  blood  of  man  doth  circulate," 
and  Isaak  Walton,  to  whom  angling  was  both  sport 
and  science.  Of  English  painters  there  were  none  of 
import,  but  the  lack  was  amply  made  up  by  the  pres- 
ence at  the  English  court  of  Van  Dyck,  Remigius 
von  Limput  and  Daniel  Mytens.  To  these  should  be 
added  Inigo  Jones,  that  noted  architect,  to  whom  the 
London  of  the  early  Stuart  period  is  so  largely  in- 
debted ;  Edward  Alleyn,  the  actor,  who  founded  Dul- 
wich  Hospital ;  Robert  Fludd,  the  alchemist,  and 
Archbishop  Usher,  to  whom  we  owe  the  usually 
adopted  form  of  biblical  chronology.  All  these  were 
more  or  less  associated  with  London  history,  and  be- 
long therefore  to  London  annals. 


i  inn  nun  mi 

A     001  020  308     1 


m 


m 


m 


